Can someone perhaps fill me in on what happended between Rommel and Streich late April 1941? Could it be that Rommel had Streich removed from command?
In a similar vein, what caused the dislike between Rommel and Kirchheim, chosen to replaced Streich as CG 5. LeiDiv?
Cheers
Leo
(edited for spelling)
5. leichte Division - Streich - Rommel - Kirchheim
Moderator: Tom Houlihan
-
Leo Niehorster
- Author
- Posts: 544
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 3:22 am
- Location: Hannover, Germany
- Contact:
5. leichte Division - Streich - Rommel - Kirchheim
Last edited by Leo Niehorster on Mon Mar 01, 2004 2:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Dr. N. -
Just a quick reference in "Hitler's Legions" by Samuel W. Mitcham on page 377 (re: 21 Pz.Div.):
Quote:
"Lieutenant General Streich and General Erwin Rommel had a mutual dislike for one another, which led to Rommel's relieving Streich of his command for his failure to take Tobruk in May 1941." end quote.
Earlier in the book [page 143] it seems Kircheim was also blamed by Rommel for not taking Tobruk:
Quote:
"He was sent to North Africa in 1941 and was named acting commander of the 5th Light Division of the Afrika Korps. Here he ran afoul of Erwin Rommel, who blamed him for failing to take Tobruk in May 1941." end quote.
I have no other details at this time.
Best regards -
Just a quick reference in "Hitler's Legions" by Samuel W. Mitcham on page 377 (re: 21 Pz.Div.):
Quote:
"Lieutenant General Streich and General Erwin Rommel had a mutual dislike for one another, which led to Rommel's relieving Streich of his command for his failure to take Tobruk in May 1941." end quote.
Earlier in the book [page 143] it seems Kircheim was also blamed by Rommel for not taking Tobruk:
Quote:
"He was sent to North Africa in 1941 and was named acting commander of the 5th Light Division of the Afrika Korps. Here he ran afoul of Erwin Rommel, who blamed him for failing to take Tobruk in May 1941." end quote.
I have no other details at this time.
Best regards -
Signed: "The Shadow"
Hi Leo,
There was friction between Streich and Rommel from the beginning as it was Streich Rommel blamed for the failure to take Tobruk on the run in April '41. There is an excellent quote in Germany and the Second World War volume 3 to the effect... Rommel: You were far too concerned with the well-being of your troops! And Streich replied: I can think of no greater words of praise for a division commander! It is surprising that Streich held any command at all after the evaluation Rommel made for his personnel record.
I think Kircheim was just the only general rank officer in-theater to hold the command until a proper replacement (v.Ravenstein) could be flown in from Germany.
Regards, Jerry
There was friction between Streich and Rommel from the beginning as it was Streich Rommel blamed for the failure to take Tobruk on the run in April '41. There is an excellent quote in Germany and the Second World War volume 3 to the effect... Rommel: You were far too concerned with the well-being of your troops! And Streich replied: I can think of no greater words of praise for a division commander! It is surprising that Streich held any command at all after the evaluation Rommel made for his personnel record.
I think Kircheim was just the only general rank officer in-theater to hold the command until a proper replacement (v.Ravenstein) could be flown in from Germany.
Regards, Jerry
When you're in command..... command!
Hi Jerry !
Your post enlightens very well some of the aspects of the relationship between Rommel and Streich.
A question :
"I think Kircheim was just the only general rank officer in-theater to hold the command until a proper replacement (v.Ravenstein) could be flown in from Germany. "
This sentence seems to indicate that you think Kirchheim's time as 5. Leichte Division commander was short, just a week or two ("until a proper replacement (...) could be flown in from Germany"). Do you know more about the days of this command (start and end) ?
Thanks !
Loic
Your post enlightens very well some of the aspects of the relationship between Rommel and Streich.
A question :
"I think Kircheim was just the only general rank officer in-theater to hold the command until a proper replacement (v.Ravenstein) could be flown in from Germany. "
This sentence seems to indicate that you think Kirchheim's time as 5. Leichte Division commander was short, just a week or two ("until a proper replacement (...) could be flown in from Germany"). Do you know more about the days of this command (start and end) ?
Thanks !
Loic
"On ne relève pas Picardie !" (Picardie Regiment is not relieved !)
Skarn:Skarn wrote:Hi Jerry !
This sentence seems to indicate that you think Kirchheim's time as 5. Leichte Division commander was short, just a week or two ("until a proper replacement (...) could be flown in from Germany"). Do you know more about the days of this command (start and end) ?
Loic
Maybe this was for that four day period not covered in Dr. Niehorster's post:
Leo Niehorster
Commanders of 5. leichte Division (mot)
18.02.42 - ??.02.41: GenMaj Hans Freiherr von Funck
07.02.41 - 16.05.41: GenMaj Johannes Streich
20.05.41 - 01.08.41: GenMaj Johann von Ravenstein
*from 16th to 20th May 1941 maybe?
I don't know - just an educated guess on my part.
best -
Signed: "The Shadow"
Hi "Shadow" !
I think Kirchheim was commander during these five days, but I think he was commander before also. Doctor Niehorster told that he was acting commander during the official commander absence. I think he was commander from early May to June 20th 1941.
But I can't be sure...
Loic
I think Kirchheim was commander during these five days, but I think he was commander before also. Doctor Niehorster told that he was acting commander during the official commander absence. I think he was commander from early May to June 20th 1941.
But I can't be sure...
Loic
"On ne relève pas Picardie !" (Picardie Regiment is not relieved !)
-
Leo Niehorster
- Author
- Posts: 544
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 3:22 am
- Location: Hannover, Germany
- Contact:
Shawn has posted an answer in the thread
"commanders of the 5. Leichte Division"
Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 4:11 am
http://www.feldgrau.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=9612
Cheers
Leo
"commanders of the 5. Leichte Division"
Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 4:11 am
http://www.feldgrau.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=9612
Cheers
Leo
-
Leo Niehorster
- Author
- Posts: 544
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 3:22 am
- Location: Hannover, Germany
- Contact:
Silviu indicated another source - Irving's "Trail of the Fox".
If you dont have it, can be downloaded at:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/index.html
David Irving
"Trail of the Fox".
Future Publications, 1978,
which I will use as a reference. I used it's index, so if the pages don't match, try looking there in another publication.
On gets the idea of the relationship already going to pot in France, 1940:
On page 62:
In France, 27.05.40, Col J. Streich has just been detched to Rommel...
"... had a blazing row with Colonel Johannes Streich, of the 15th Panzer regiment, who pointed out that Rommel was not reading the maps right."
On page 68:
Discussion of Rommel's actions during the 1940 French Campaign:
"(Colonel Streich later added a sidelight: 'Rommel seized this oppostunity to filch my own heavy tanks for use in his division's advance as well', he wrote. 'When my general, Hartlieb, protetsed he was told that General Hoth has sanctioned it; I myself don't believe foa a minute that Rommel asked his permission. Our infantry took very heavy casualties as a consequence.')
While Streich was commanding the 5. LeiDiv in Africa, Irving writes of several occasions where the Rommel and Streich collided.
Then we meet MajGen Heinrich Kirchheim for the first time.
On page 104:
"DIssatisfied with Streich, Rommel put General Heinrich Kirchheim in command. Kirchheim was a War Ministry tropical-warfare expert who just happened to be in Libya at the time."
Page 115:
The closing act.
"And he got rid of Streich. One day at the end of May he telephoned Streich's command truck. 'Streich,' he said, 'I have asked for you to be replaced, You will continue in command, however, until your replacement arrives.'
Streich's opinion of Rommel was obviously not very high, underlined by his comments to Brauchitsch. Page 121
Whatever one might say about Irvine's right wing tendencies, his Rommel boigraphy is certainly worth reading.
Cheers
Leo
If you dont have it, can be downloaded at:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/index.html
David Irving
"Trail of the Fox".
Future Publications, 1978,
which I will use as a reference. I used it's index, so if the pages don't match, try looking there in another publication.
On gets the idea of the relationship already going to pot in France, 1940:
On page 62:
In France, 27.05.40, Col J. Streich has just been detched to Rommel...
"... had a blazing row with Colonel Johannes Streich, of the 15th Panzer regiment, who pointed out that Rommel was not reading the maps right."
On page 68:
Discussion of Rommel's actions during the 1940 French Campaign:
"(Colonel Streich later added a sidelight: 'Rommel seized this oppostunity to filch my own heavy tanks for use in his division's advance as well', he wrote. 'When my general, Hartlieb, protetsed he was told that General Hoth has sanctioned it; I myself don't believe foa a minute that Rommel asked his permission. Our infantry took very heavy casualties as a consequence.')
While Streich was commanding the 5. LeiDiv in Africa, Irving writes of several occasions where the Rommel and Streich collided.
Then we meet MajGen Heinrich Kirchheim for the first time.
On page 104:
"DIssatisfied with Streich, Rommel put General Heinrich Kirchheim in command. Kirchheim was a War Ministry tropical-warfare expert who just happened to be in Libya at the time."
Page 115:
The closing act.
"And he got rid of Streich. One day at the end of May he telephoned Streich's command truck. 'Streich,' he said, 'I have asked for you to be replaced, You will continue in command, however, until your replacement arrives.'
Streich's opinion of Rommel was obviously not very high, underlined by his comments to Brauchitsch. Page 121
Whatever one might say about Irvine's right wing tendencies, his Rommel boigraphy is certainly worth reading.
Cheers
Leo
Here's some info from the divisional history(Aberger: Die 5.(lei.)/21.Panzer-Division):
(pg.47) early April 1941:
Zwischen Rommel und dem Kommadeur der 5.lei.Div., Generalmajor Streich, war es zu einer Vertrauenskrise gekommen. Rommel bemägelte das zögernde Vorgehen der Kampfgruppen und die teilweise unklare Befehlsgebung. Er erteilte daher dem in Tripolis eingetroffenen Kommandeur der 15.Pz.Div., Generalmajor Prittwitz u.Gaffron, den Befehl, mit allen an der Küstenstraße eingetroffenen Teilen der 5.lei.Div. auf Tobruk vorzugehen. Dies waren die A.A.3, Pz.Jg.Abt.39, MGBtl.8, I./Art.Rgt.75, 5./MG.Btl.2 und Rgt.Stab zbV 200. Das Pz.Rgt.5 folgte nach einer Instandssetzungspause.
(pg.56)late April:
Die 5.lei.Div. hatte für den Angriff [on Tobruk - 28 April] das MG.Btl.2 und das Pi.Btl.200 bereitgestellt. Die Führung der Division hatte Rommel Generallt. Kirchheim übertragen.
(pg.63)
Bei der 5.lei.Div. hatte es einen Führungswechsel gegeben. Generalmajor Streich, dessen Führungsqualitäten von Rommel bezweifelt wurden, verließ am 16.5. Nordafrika. Sein Nachfolger wurde vier Tage später Generalmajor v.Ravenstein. bereits Ende April hatte Rommel im kleinen Kreis gesagt: "Die Führung der Division beherrscht nicht die Kunst durch Zusammenfassung aller Waffen einen Schwerpunkt zu bilden, dort einen Durchbruch zu erzwingen, nach den Seiten aufzurollen und zu sichern und blitzartig, ehe der Gegner reagiert hat, ins Innere zu stoßen".
Hope this helps
Marko
(pg.47) early April 1941:
Zwischen Rommel und dem Kommadeur der 5.lei.Div., Generalmajor Streich, war es zu einer Vertrauenskrise gekommen. Rommel bemägelte das zögernde Vorgehen der Kampfgruppen und die teilweise unklare Befehlsgebung. Er erteilte daher dem in Tripolis eingetroffenen Kommandeur der 15.Pz.Div., Generalmajor Prittwitz u.Gaffron, den Befehl, mit allen an der Küstenstraße eingetroffenen Teilen der 5.lei.Div. auf Tobruk vorzugehen. Dies waren die A.A.3, Pz.Jg.Abt.39, MGBtl.8, I./Art.Rgt.75, 5./MG.Btl.2 und Rgt.Stab zbV 200. Das Pz.Rgt.5 folgte nach einer Instandssetzungspause.
(pg.56)late April:
Die 5.lei.Div. hatte für den Angriff [on Tobruk - 28 April] das MG.Btl.2 und das Pi.Btl.200 bereitgestellt. Die Führung der Division hatte Rommel Generallt. Kirchheim übertragen.
(pg.63)
Bei der 5.lei.Div. hatte es einen Führungswechsel gegeben. Generalmajor Streich, dessen Führungsqualitäten von Rommel bezweifelt wurden, verließ am 16.5. Nordafrika. Sein Nachfolger wurde vier Tage später Generalmajor v.Ravenstein. bereits Ende April hatte Rommel im kleinen Kreis gesagt: "Die Führung der Division beherrscht nicht die Kunst durch Zusammenfassung aller Waffen einen Schwerpunkt zu bilden, dort einen Durchbruch zu erzwingen, nach den Seiten aufzurollen und zu sichern und blitzartig, ehe der Gegner reagiert hat, ins Innere zu stoßen".
Hope this helps
Marko
Johannes Streich was a tragic victim of Rommels impatience, impetuosity, rashness and overly aggressive spirit. There can be no doubt that Rommel mismanaged the whole 1941 Tobruk campaign because he underestimated the strength of the Allied defenses. The deaths of Generalmajor Prittwitz and Oberstleutnant Ponath can be directly attributed to Rommels flawed strategy, and apparently Streichs main mistake in Rommels eyes was that he didn't allow himself and his division to be butchered in the fashion of MG-Bataillon 8. In essence, Rommel blamed Streich and Oberst Olbrich of PzRgt 5 for his own errors and subsequently destroyed their careers. Just before the fateful attack of April 14, Rommel had severly criticized Streich in the presence of junior officers. He then ordered Streich to lead the attack in person, attaching his Ordnonnanzoffizier, Leutnant H.W. Schmidt, to him as a "supervisor". When Streich requested that a tank should be given to him as an escort for his unprotected Kübelwagen, Rommel sent him a Panzer I (!). Streich was given insufficient information about the location of the British lines and the promised guide also never showed up. In consequence, Streich blundered into the British lines, the useless Pz I was disabled within seconds, and Streich, Schmidt and the tank crewmen hat to run for cover through the enemy crossfire, barely escaping with their lives due to the still prevailing morning darkness. In contrast to Rommel, who was always willing to sacrifice his troops for a expected success, Streich was a cautious officer who cared for his subordinates, and this difference of character was enough to create an atmosphere of distrust in which the ranking officer finally decided to get rid of the dissenter.
this is very interresting because i also read about Rommel's sacrificing of his men for an objective...but what is also interesting about it, is that, he never had very high casualties (exept some cases, tobruk for instance)...seem's he also preserved a lot of lives by attacking like he did: fast and right in to the flanks or rear, where no one expected him to be (like in france), sometiomes without covering his own flanks (which the confused enemy didn't even notice)
i wonder what would he command if he would be sent to the eastern front...
i wonder what would he command if he would be sent to the eastern front...
There are no desperate situations, there are only desperate people. - Heinz Guderian
-- Sine doctrina vita est quasi mortis imago. --
-- Sine doctrina vita est quasi mortis imago. --
bemägelte oder bemängelte?
Hi Marko
I am trying to read the transcription you were so kind to post in your reply. It along with Stefans reply are very educational.
I was wondering though, if the first paragraph should say Rommel bemängelte or if it is right the way is typed now. I looked for it in Leo German online dictionary and in my Langenscheidt Großwörterbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache and I could not find it, but i did find it as bemängeln.
again thank you very much for the transcription, sorry to bother with nuances
Best regards
Héctor
I am trying to read the transcription you were so kind to post in your reply. It along with Stefans reply are very educational.
I was wondering though, if the first paragraph should say Rommel bemängelte or if it is right the way is typed now. I looked for it in Leo German online dictionary and in my Langenscheidt Großwörterbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache and I could not find it, but i did find it as bemängeln.
again thank you very much for the transcription, sorry to bother with nuances
Best regards
Héctor