WI Hitler Appointed Von Manstein as Commander in Chief?

Historically, Erich von Manstein was probably the leading 'contender' amongst German officers after 1942 for appointment to Supreme Commander of German Forces, if Hitler would allow such a position to be created with effective power. Also, historically, von Manstein, arguably the best German commander of the war was dismissed by Hitler in March 1944 for repeated and direct criticism of his strategic decisions. However, at the same time, any doubts about his loyalty seem to have been relatively minimal, at least as far as Hitler was concerned- nothing else happened other than an upgrade to his Knight's Cross.

So how does the war change if Von Manstein, who was the primary architect of the titular Manstein plan for invading France and conducted a successful (if relatively minor) offensive after Stalingrad against Kharkov, doing a great deal to salvage the German position, as well as managing to keep his assigned Army Group South in one piece (no mean feat) in the aftermath of Kursk was actually appointed, either formally or in some titular second-in-command position to either/or Supreme Commander in the East or as overall Supreme Commander of German forces.

My proposition is that the earliest possible POD would've been in July 1942, after Manstein had seized Sevastopol- not likely his most brilliant achievement (I would nominate the plan for attacking France or perhaps the Kharkov offensive of 1943), but one that Hitler was particularly delighted with. Another possible POD would be in the immediate aftermath of the Kharkov offensive in March 1943.

Likely? Given Hitler's personality, not the most likely of possibilites- but perhaps with support from other generals (and at least postwar, many of the German generals specifically stated their desire to see von Manstein in that position), it could've been possible.

How would this change the war? A lot, a little?
 
I agree Von Manstein would be the best candidate to be the Commander-in-Chief of the Eastern Front.
But given Hitler's personality to get this to happen is anybody's guess. Probably needs to be incapacitated, due to illness.
The results: Perhaps better co-ordination of weapons supplies. More effective use of German forces.
Don't go for Baku, make do with Maikop, seize the eastern side of the Volga - take Tashkent let Stalingrad 'wither on the vine'.

The Germans still won't win, but it will cost the Russians more dead, and the war will probably take another six months with the Anglo-Americans taking Berlin.
 
I agree Von Manstein would be the best candidate to be the Commander-in-Chief of the Eastern Front.
But given Hitler's personality to get this to happen is anybody's guess. Probably needs to be incapacitated, due to illness.
The results: Perhaps better co-ordination of weapons supplies. More effective use of German forces.
Don't go for Baku, make do with Maikop, seize the eastern side of the Volga - take Tashkent let Stalingrad 'wither on the vine'.

The Germans still won't win, but it will cost the Russians more dead, and the war will probably take another six months with the Anglo-Americans taking Berlin.

Illness would work just fine.

But, um, take Tashkent? Way down in Uzbekistan? That seems ... unlikely. I honestly would think that it would be better just to GO for Baku, and not fixate so much on Stalingrad, or hell, to fixate on Stalingrad without dividing forces on an attack mission in the Caucasus as well. I think it was the division of forces that really killed Operation Blue.

I agree that one reliable outcome would probably be the seizure of Berlin by Anglo-American forces, and indeed, they might've gone further than that.
 
Want immortality in alternate history?

Just live and write your memoirs...

I've read Manstein's memoirs, "Lost Victories". The self-serving tone (mostly about the war crimes issues) annoy the living hell out of me, but there's no doubting that the man would've done a better job than Hitler did IRL. A lot of the things he says with hindsight are, really, pretty much the same things he said when he was actually operating. It doesn't hurt that other German generals themselves pretty much agreed he was the best of them.
 
His record wasn't that outstanding really as a field commander. He got a lot of credit for the sickleschnidt (sp) plan in 1940 fair enough, but did poorly in Barbarossa in the Baltic advance as a divisional commander in 1941, showing little initiative imo.

Kharkov "Back-hand stroke" was excellent, but before that he failed to relieve Stalingrad in Winter Storm.

I think there were many better commanders available like Model and Kesselring, and of course his war crime record was very bad. He just loved his waffen SS divisions.

He was however of the very few German senior generals who would tell Hitler where to get off, so.....I dunno. I have his latest biography "Janus head" and it's not really very complimentary.

Maybe he could have spun things a bit by avoiding cockups like Kursk and Bagration in 1944, but without a total reoganisation of German industry and a seperate peace in the West, Germany had little chance to radically change things in Russia by 1943.

Just my 2 cents as an interested casual reader of Eastern Front histories.
 
His record wasn't that outstanding really as a field commander. He got a lot of credit for the sickleschnidt (sp) plan in 1940 fair enough, but did poorly in Barbarossa in the Baltic advance as a divisional commander in 1941, showing little initiative imo.

Kharkov "Back-hand stroke" was excellent, but before that he failed to relieve Stalingrad in Winter Storm.

I think there were many better commanders available like Model and Kesselring, and of course his war crime record was very bad. He just loved his waffen SS divisions.

He was however of the very few German senior generals who would tell Hitler where to get off, so.....I dunno. I have his latest biography "Janus head" and it's not really very complimentary.

Maybe he could have spun things a bit by avoiding cockups like Kursk and Bagration in 1944, but without a total reoganisation of German industry and a seperate peace in the West, Germany had little chance to radically change things in Russia by 1943.

Just my 2 cents as an interested casual reader of Eastern Front histories.

There's little doubting that he was not precisely a wonderful human being. I'm more surprised to hear about the criticism of his war record. As for Stalingrad, I was under the impression that the biggest problems were that people were not listening to him.

I'll have to see if I can pick 'Janus Head' up. I just can't help but have a sneaking suspicion, though, that some people might be motivated to undermine his military achievements on the basis of his (rather loathsome) record in terms of war crimes.
 
I've read Manstein's memoirs, "Lost Victories". The self-serving tone (mostly about the war crimes issues) annoy the living hell out of me, but there's no doubting that the man would've done a better job than Hitler did IRL. A lot of the things he says with hindsight are, really, pretty much the same things he said when he was actually operating. It doesn't hurt that other German generals themselves pretty much agreed he was the best of them.

He has 3 only suggestions:

1. Put him in charge.

2. Give him more men.

3. Let him retreat.
 
There is an interesting analysis of his record in command of 56
panzer Corps (not divisional as I said earlier) under Hoeppner in Stolfi's "Hitlers Panzer East". He stuffed around, not crossing the Dvina for days, "awaiting orders" instead of pressing on to Leningrad, which was wide open.

He blamed Hoeppner for lack of orders and Hoeppner blamed him for lack of initiative, but he was no Guderian.

His family are keeping secrets to this day as the author of "Janus Head" remarks, refusing access to any of his personal records.
 
I think there were many better commanders available like Model and Kesselring, and of course his war crime record was very bad.
(quote]

As has been said, Manstein was probably the only General, the other commanders in the German Army on the Eastern Front had enough respect for, to be a Commander-in-Chief.
For a bit of additional information on the German Generals, try 'Hitler's Generals' by Richard Brett-Smith.

Kaiser Kris: Sorry did I say Tashkent! I meant to write Astrakhan!! If Baku is reached, and I think the distance is too far, possession of Astrakhan gives the Germans a route for the oil - once Stalingrad is secure. And I think Astrakhan is where lend-lease supplies landed from Persia.
Otherwise, IMO it is best to concentrate on the oilfields Maykop to Terek, giving more potential for the liberated oil to go to Rostov or via Kuban across the Black Sea. Baku was an oil field too far!
 

burmafrd

Banned
The key to winning if there was one was destroying the russian oil supply.
Do that and everything grinds to a halt. Nothing else will really work. That should have been clear from the beginning. When your enemy has only one source of a commodity absolutely vital to continuing in the war, you go after it. When that commodity is OIL, of which with the exception of manpower there is no more important single item, its even more important. You did not even have to TAKE the oil fields- just get the Luftwaffe close enough to it that you could continuously bomb them.
 
The key to winning if there was one was destroying the russian oil supply.
Do that and everything grinds to a halt. Nothing else will really work. That should have been clear from the beginning. When your enemy has only one source of a commodity absolutely vital to continuing in the war, you go after it. When that commodity is OIL, of which with the exception of manpower there is no more important single item, its even more important. You did not even have to TAKE the oil fields- just get the Luftwaffe close enough to it that you could continuously bomb them.

Can't remember the book but author claimed that by taking Astrakhan the Soviets oil supply being shipped across the Caspian to that city to be wheeled north would be cut.
 
Can't remember the book but author claimed that by taking Astrakhan the Soviets oil supply being shipped across the Caspian to that city to be wheeled north would be cut.

It makes sense. Astrakhan is on the Volga Delta. Seize Astrakhan, and well, Stalingrad doesn't matter as much, because you've probably cut off the Volga at the very bottom.

OTL, the Germans actually managed to send reconaissance units to the outer suburbs of Astrakhan during Operation Blue.
 
Top