Critiques: Rommel's Intelligence in the Desert Campaign by Hans-Otto Behrendt - Book Report/Review Example

? Book Critiques - Rommel's Intelligence in the Desert Campaign Hans-Otto Behrendt was a senior member of the Field Marshal ErwinRommel’s Jr. Intelligence group from early 1941 until the end of the North African Campaign. Rommel's Intelligence in the Desert Campaign by Hans-Otto Behrendt retells the revelation of the fight that happened in North America specifically in Egypt and Libya1. The campaign started at around June in 1940 to early 1943. The campaign was initiated by commonwealth and British forces for the purpose of preventing the axis forces from seizing the Suez Canal because it was an important canal for supply and communication purposes. The first campaign was initiated by a debacle from Italians and was soon followed by Rommel’s group that had German and Italian combined forces2. The battle featured the sea and air struggles for superiority. Hans-Otto Behrendt tells the reader about this campaign and the struggles and battles that were featured in it. Despite the fact that Rommel’s force had professionalism while engaging in the campaign, his force was inferior in terms of population of the army as compared to the axis forces. His troops were led professionally and had an admirable form of cooperation. On the other hand, the British forces that had originally formed the first campaign were remarkably slow to adapt to the harsh weather conditions of the desert3. The war did not make it any better for them because they moved from one place to another. They had mistrust against each other and had little coordination in terms of the efforts they laid in the war. In comparison to Rommel’s controlled and well coordinated forces, the Lieutenant O’Connor’s forces became indifferent to each other and unmanageable. This was only solved when Montgomery arrived in 19424. As Hans-Otto Behrendt says, the fighting that erupted in the vast desert in Libya involved a large distance. They covered a great expanse and had a problem of the supply of weapons. Another major problem that seriously affected the campaign involves the fact that the numbers of the fighters was minimal compared to the vastness of the desert that they fought in. this means that the loss of lives for fighters seriously weakened the campaign. The rate of diseases was high and was compounded by the lack of clean water for drinking and for use on other purposes. Despite the fact that the fighters were faced by a lot of hardships, the absence of large populations of civilians and the Schutzstaffeln (SS) army helped the fighters cover large distances in a short time. In fact, when Rommel wrote to his wife in March 1941, he told her that in the fight, speed was the essential factor, as opposed to the territory they fought in5. Irrespective of the lack of coordination among the British groups that comprised of the Popski’s Private Army and Long Range Desert Group, they played a significant role in the campaign. The terrain of the land where they fought was flat and had no obstructions6. Dust and sand covered the land and was churned by fire and tanks that were used in the war. The groups used vehicles and armory of the other group making it hard for the opponents to identify them. The navigation in the desert was hard allowing only a few to master it. Air support was also essential for the troops. Therefore, the troops used signaling war skills. The ULTRA intelligence used by the British forces helped them know the plans of the Germans firsthand. However, Rommel was intelligent on his part because the signals he sent to others did not signify the specific plan he had7. Italy declared war in 1940 but it was until Mussolini ordered Marshal Graziani to use his Tenth Army to launch an invasion in Egypt led by General Mario Berti. The western Desert force that was mobile and largely ill equipped withdrew before the Italian forces could launch the attack. The army led by Berti came to Sidi Barrani on September 16 1940. Berti was tired of waiting and decided to attack on December, 9 when he received additional tanks from the United Kingdom. This attack brought immense losses to them especially with the death of Bardia and led to their withdrawal. Initially, Rommel had launched an attack that he referred to as a raid. When he got a chance, he ignored orders from his superiors (Commando Supremo) and Hitler8. He went further into Cyrenaica using the Italian Arete Division9. Following his raid, O’Connor and Neame were arrested. Rommel went further till he reached Solum. The attack that Rommel had launched overtook all the successes that the British forces had made. He provided important airspace where the German forces would siege Malta. This was in contrast to the success that the German High Command Army would want because it was concentrating on Greece and the USSR invasion. General Halder who was the Chief of Staff of the German ARMY condemned Rommel as a man who was stark mad. He sent his deputy, Lieutenant General Paulus to investigate Rommel. He recommended that Rommel be put on the defensive. Rommel was not only strategic but he was also an intelligent leader who was able to beat his opponents with ease10. Rommel possessed many qualities that other troop leader’s like O’Connor did not have. He was able to marshal his troops to concur others. He used his own operational objectives to force his superiors to accept new strategies that he saw fit to use in the campaigns in Libya. Despite the fact that he was an able leader, his strategies made Germany loss its grasp in North Africa. He took the tactical operations on his own command and caused confusion and uncertainty among the forces he controlled. The most notable success achieved by Rommel was to establish the Afrika Korps and a strong sense of identity and unity11. Rommel imparted self reliance to his troops to the extent that they grew in terms of number because members believed that under the leadership of Rommel they could accomplish anything that seemed unachievable. He was fearless, tireless, courageous, determined and competent in terms of how he handled his troops and the attacks he launched. He was at the forefront of attacks fighting alongside his superiors12. He motivated his troops to further their attacks to unconceivable heights. His Afrika Korps fought by the rules and were morally unparalleled. At one point, Rommel disobeyed an order by Hitler to slaughter prisoners of war who were on commando missions. He treated all of them in humane ways. Rommel was ingenuous and had an unparalleled professional wisdom. He could use old weapons in new ways. For instance, he used his 88 millimeter guns with their barrels put horizontally in anti-tank manner. This method was very useful and it worked against the British13. Despite the successes that Rommel achieved, he failed because he was not patient and did not plan adequately. He mostly forced his attacks to annihilate his enemies. This made him adamant to the extent that he did not care to know about his opponent’s strategies and positions. He failed to communicate with his junior commanders and his seniors sometimes resulting to poor planning. He conceived the campaign more tactical than operational. Therefore, he did not see the importance of planning. He went from battle to another without rest or planning. This cost him and his country dearly14. In conclusion, Hans-Otto Behrendt has successfully exemplified the activities that went on in the campaign in Libya and Egypt. He specifically shows the reader the different strategies applied by Germans, Italians and British troops. Rommel has been described as a skillful and determinant leader of the Afrika Korps15. He used his tactical knowledge adequately but failed because he ignored his opponents and lack operational skills. Despite the fact that he beat most of his opponents, the opponents took advantage of his weakness and beat him in the battle, finally. Reference Behrendt, Hans-Otto. Rommel's Intelligence in the Desert Campaign. London: William Kimber & Company, Limited, 1985. Read More