Page 443
Chapter 20
The German
Counteroffensive in the Ardennes
By Charles V. P. von
Luttichau
(See end of file for
information on author)
The German counteroffensive through the
Ardennes in the winter of 1944, the Battle of the Bulge, will long
be recalled in American military annals as having inflicted on the
U.S. 12th Army Group the first and only serious reverse it suffered
in its sweep from Normandy to the Rhine. The heady optimism of the
breakout from Normandy and the pursuit across France into Belgium
and Luxembourg in August and September had been dashed by the
failure of logistics to keep up with the speed of pursuit and the
unexpectedly stubborn resistance of the Germans as they fell back on
their West Wall. But in November General Eisenhower, believing that
he now had available the strength to disregard unfavorable weather
and the approach of winter, directed Lt. Gen. Omar N. Bradley to
launch the U.S. 12th Army Group on an offensive north and south of
the Ardennes with the Rhine as its objective. In December the First
U.S. Army was attacking east of Aachen toward the Roer, and Lt. Gen.
George S. Patton's Third Army, south of the Ardennes, was punching
its way toward the Saar. Counting on the defensive strength of the
terrain, General Bradley was holding his line in the Ardennes with
minimum forces.
On 16 December the Germans crashed
through these with a massive counteroffensive. It came as a complete
surprise, created widespread if momentary consternation, halted the
Allied offensive, and cost the Americans and British over 70,000
casualties before they could contain it. [1]
[1] The planning and preparations of
the German Ardennes offensive are described in detail in Hugh M.
Cole, The Ardennes, a volume in preparation for UNITED STATES
ARMY IN WORLD WAR II. Other volumes in this series covering related
operations and events are: Forrest C. Pogue, The Supreme Command
(Washington, 1954), especially Chapter XX; Martin Blumenson,
Breakout and Pursuit, and Charles B. MacDonald, The Siegfried
Line Campaign (both in preparation); Hugh M. Cole, The
Lorraine Campaign (Washington, 1950).
Reference made below to monographs (in
the R-series) dealing with special aspects of German operations in
World War II. The R-Series monographs are historical studies based
on German captured documents and additional information obtained
from highranking German participants in the events described. These
manuscripts are written in support of volumes in UNITED STATES ARMY
IN WORLD WAR II and are in OCMH files.
Page 444
The German decision to launch an
offensive in the Ardennes was Hitler's. It was a decision in which
the Chief of State, acting as Commander in Chief of the Wehrmacht,
overrode the judgement of his military advisers. Hitlerwas the
originator of the idea. He was the driving force behind the
astounding feat of assembling the necessary forces. He came to the
west in person to supervise the preparations and direct the
operation. He personnally prescribed the ambitious objectives and
attached the extravagant hopes to a victorious outcome that
converted an otherwise strictly tactical operation into a fateful
strategic decision. [2]
The late hour of the war and the fact
that Hilter was committing Germany's last reseves in men and
resources gave the venture a character of finality and grave
political significance. In Hitler's own words, the outcome of the
battle would spell either life or death for the German nation. Over
the years the Fuehrer had come to identify his person with the
German people and their destiny. Seen in this light the Ardennes was
a battle for Hitler's survival and that of the Nazi regime. If the
events to be recounted seem to defy military logic, it was, in part,
because the founder of a Reich that was to last a thousand years was
a fanatic whose intuition had long since triumphed over sound
reasoning.
The Background
In the middle of September 1944 Hitler
startled his closest advisers with the announcement that he would
launch a large-scale offensive through the Ardennes in November. The
decision was not a sudden inspiration. Indeed, the origins of the
idea for a counteroffensive can be traced as far back as the end of
July when Hitler was more immediately concerned with the aftermath
of the 20 July con-
[2] (1) Minutes of Conference of 31
July 1944: Besprechung des Guehrers mit Generaloberst Jodl am
31.7.1944 in der Wolfsschanze (near Rastenburg, East Prussia).
(2) OKW/WFSt (Oberkommando der Wehrmacht/Wehrmachtfuehrungsstab-Armed
Forces High Command/Armed Forces Operations Staff) Kreigstagebuch
(War Diary, abbreviated KTB), Ausarbeitung, Der Westen,
1.IV.-16., XII. 44, referred to hereafter as Der Westen
(Schramm). Maj. Percy E. Schramm, keeper of the WFSt War
Diary wrote this draft from records and daily notes made at OKW
headquarters.
Page 445
spiracy that had culminated in the
well-known attempt on his life at the Fuehrer's East Prussian
headquarters and with plans to counteract the Allied breakthrough at
Avranches. A succession of abortive attempts to turn the tide and
stop the Allied advance across France by counterattacking at Mortain
and later in Alsace appeared to have merely confirmed Hitler in his
determination to inflict upon the Western Allies a crushing defeat
that would influence in his favor the final outcome of the war. [3]
The plan for the big counteroffensive
took shape during a period of internal insecurity and catastrophic
Axis defeats on the fronts in the East and West.
In the East the Soviet summer offensive
had driven in one sweep from the Dnieper to the gates of Warsaw and
the banks of the Vistula, had isolated-temporarily-an army group in
the Baltic States, and had brought the Russians within reach of the
German homeland. Here their spectacular advance, having outrun its
supplies, ground to a halt. In the Balkans, the Russian had occupied
Rumania, then Bulgaria, and continued an almost unopposed advance
toward Hungary. This movement threatened to cut off the German
forces in Greece, Albania, and Yugoslavia, and force Hitler to order
the evacuation of the first two of these occupied countries.
In Italy the Germans had fallen back to
the Gothic Line, last transpeninsular defense position short of the
Po Valley. In the far north the capitulation of Finland had rendered
untentable the advanced German positions in the Scandinavian theater
of operations.
The catastrophes in the East were
matched, if nor surpassed, by the dangers in the West. By
mid-September the Allies had liberated most of France, Belgium, and
Luxembourg and were threatening the all-important Ruhr area, the
industrial heart of Germany. They had also captured the vital harbor
at Antwerp, a strategic objective of whose importance for the
conduct of future operations both Eisenhower and Hitler were equally
convinced. To meet the mounting crisis in the West, Hitler had
recalled from temporary retirement Field Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt,
charging him with the defense of the western approaches to the
Reich. Rundstedt achieved what seemed impossi-
[3] The exact date when Hitler made his
startling announcement was Sunday, 16 September, during a situation
conference with his top advisers. A detailed account of the meeting
is contained in the personal diary of the Chief of Staff of the
Luftwaffe, General Werner Kreipe, in OCMH files as MS # P-069 (Kreipe).
See also Hitler-Jodl Conference, 31 Jul 44, cited above, n. 2.
Measures taken to implement the decision to launch a large-scale
counteroffensive were, among others, the constitution of the Sixth
Panzer Army (Sepp Dietrich) ordered on 6 September 1944. For details
on the origin of the idea and the course of events leading up to the
Ardennes offensive see MS # R-9, The Idea for the German Ardennes
Offensive in 1944, by Magna E. Bauer.
Page 446
ble: with their backs to the imaginary
safety of the Seigfried Line, the armies in the West once more
formed a coherent defense line, taut and precariously thin, but
strong enough to frustrate the daring Allied bid (Operation
MARKET-GARDEN) to jump the formidable obstacles of the lower Meuse
and Rhine.
Within three months, the Wehrmacht had
lost n battle 50 divisions in the East and another 28 in the West,
an appalling total of 78 divisions, or one and half million men, and
an area several times as big as Germany. [4]
Goering's once powerful Luftwaffe had
ceased to be a factor that could influence decisively the outcome of
the struggle. At this stage of the war the Luftwaffe had to all
purposes shot it bolt. Outclassed by Allied air, short of trained
personnel and fuel, incapable of replacing mounting losses, the
German Air Force had fallen into disgrace in Hitler's eyes.
Recalling Hermann Goering's boastful prewar remarks that his
fighters would sweep enemy intruders out of the skies, the people
sarcastically referred to Allied bomber formations penetrating the
heart of the Reich almost without challenge as "Parteitag Fluege"
(demonstration flights staged by the Luftwaffe for the prewar Nazi
Party congresses at Nuremberg). So paralyzed was this once imposing
sword of the German blitz campaigns that it could not even prevent
the ever-increasing bombardments of vital synthetic fuel plants. [5]
Yet the offensive spirit of the German fighter arm under its able
commander General Adolf Galland had not been broken. Indeed, during
the worst setbacks Galland was busy assembling a last reserve of
pilots and planes to strike a potentially decisive blow at Allied
air. Suicidal as the plan for this large-scale operation against
Allied daylight bombers may have been, it might well have brought
startling results had Hitler accepted it; but he did not. And thus
one of the most daring operations planned in tghe World War II never
came to a full-blown test. [6]
Analogously the Navy had lost its
former important position. As the Luftwaffe was reduced to
abstemious use of its fighter arm, so was the German Navy regarding
its U-boats. After the Allies had captured or sealed off all
submarine bases in France, the remaining ones nearer
[4] MS # R-19, Germany's Situation in
the Fall of 1944, Part III, The Military Situation, by Charles V. P.
von Luttichau.
[5] (1) U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey. The Over-all Report (European
War), September 30, 1945, and The Effects of Strategic Bombing on
the German War Economy, October 31, 1945. (2) For additional
information see MS # R-25, Germany's Situation in the Fall of 1944,
Part II, The Economic Situation, by Charles V. P. von Luttichau.
[6] The Rise and Fall of the German Air Force (1933-1945),
issued by the Air Ministry (London, 1948), pp. 370-73. (2) Adolf
Galland, Die Ersten und die Letzten (Darmstadt; Franz
Schneekluth, 1953). (3) Chester Wilmot, The Struggle for Europe
(New York: Harper & Brothers, 1952), pp. 442-44.
Page 447
the Reich had become more vulnerable.
The rapdid advance of the Soviet armies along the shores of the
Baltic Sea threatened to deprive the Navy of the training waters
that Admiral Karl Doenitz considered essential to break in the
revolutionary new U-boats now under construction in German
shipyards. Only with these faster, snorkel-equipped submarines could
he hope to resume the U-boat offensive that had once threatened to
destroy the tenuous communication lines of Allied global warfare. So
vital appeard the retention of control of the Baltic Sea coast to
Doenitz that he persuaded Hitler, against the sound advice of the
Army's Chief of Staff to hold on to this northern sector of the
Eastern front at the extreme risk of strategic breakthrough in the
weakened center to the heart of Germany. [7]
The burden of defending Hitler's
Festung Europa thus had to be shouldered by the Army. As
Napolean I said, an army marches on its stomach, but in modern
warfare the "stomach" had grown to include the resources and
productive capacity of the nation. Vast areas that so far had
supplied the German war machine with essential raw materials had now
been recaptured by the Allies. It was obvious, even to Hitler, that
Germany could not continue the struggle indefinately. Under the
direction of Albert Speer German production experienced a tremendous
growth despite stepped-up Allied bombings. In September of 1944 the
economy still profited from the peak production level reached during
the summer. Yet accumulated stocks, effective dispersion of
industries, and a radical curtailment of civilian needs could assure
continued adequate supply of the armed forces for only about six
more months. Estimates for a longer lease on life were unrealistic.
In September the breakdown of transportation, which later was to
deprive the German high command of the advantage of interior lines,
was still a dreaded specter. Not until the end of the year did the
paralysis of railroad communications hit an already collapsing
economy. While the transportation crisis was still a matter of the
future, the fuel oil drought was a present reality. It had
contributed decisively to the grounding of the Luftwaffe. Now it
threatened to immobilize the Army. To supply Hitler's final
offensive in the West with fuel, the meager allotments to all other
theaters of operations had to be cut below the minimum subsistence
levels. With this decision Hitler incurred the grave risk of
depriving the already inadequate armored re-
[7] (1) Mintues of Conferences of the
Commander in Chief, Navy, with Hitler, 1-3 Jan 44, 9 Jul 44, 19 Jan
45, in Fuehrer Conferences on Matters Dealing with the German Navy
1944 and 1945, in OCMH files. (2) Wilmot, Struggle for Europe,
pp. 147, 151-52, 617-20. (3) Heinz Guderian, Erinnerungen eines
Soldaten (Heidleberg: Kurt Vowinckel, 1951) pp. 320, 322, and
341ff.; the English edition is called Panzer Leader (New
York: E. P. Dutton and Company, Inc., 1952). Subsequent references
are to the German edition.
Page 448
serves, especially on the Eastern
front, of their ability to maneuver in the event of large-scale
attack. [8]
The abortive 20 July uprising of the
German underground affected the Ardennes in two ways:
(1) The failure of the attempt
confirmed Hitler in his obession that he was the leader chosen by
"Providence" for his mission and gave him the opportunity to break
all opposition within Germany and establish complete control over
the nation via the Gestapo and the Party.
(2) He reacted to it by immediately
putting into effect a series of drastic "Total War" measures,
designed to supply him with additional forces for a final
counteroffensive. By lowering the draft age to 16 years and
extending it to include the 50-year-olds and by combing out the home
front and armed forces, he put an additional three quarters of a
million men under arms. He thus built up a new strategic reserve
consisting of 25 Volksgrenadier divisions and at leas 6 panzer
divisions. These were raised and trained under the newly appointed
commander of the Replacement Army, Gestapo Chief Heinrich Himmler.
In addition, a great number of artillery, Werfer (rocker
projectors), and armored units were formed, thus theoretically
creating a very flexible instrument in the hands of a capable
commander. [9]
In October the Germans once more
achieved stabilization of the fronts in the main theaters of
operations. Even in the Balkans and Hungary, where the Russian
continued their advance, German resistance was stiffening. By
scraping the bottom of the barrel, the German economy and war
machine appeared capable of mounting one final large-scale
offensive. It was now up to Hitler to decide where to launch it.
Strategic and
Tactical Considerations Influencing the Decision
After the defeats of the summer of
1944, the remaining German war potential was so seriously reduced
that Hitler might have concluded that he no longer coudl win the war
and should seek an armistice. Germany's allies-Japan, Italy,
Finland-had undertaken, late in 1942, to induce Hitler to seek an
agreement with the
[8] (1) Sources cited n. 5(1). (2)
Guderian, op. cit., pp. 341ff. (3) For more detail see MS #
R-25.
[9] (1) KTB, GenStdH/Org Abt (General Staff of the
Army/Organization Division), 13 Jun-31 Aug 44. (2) For more
detail see MS #R-12, The Ardennes Offensive, Planning and
Preparations, Ch. I, The Preliminary Planning, by Charles V. P. von
Luttichau. (3) Der Westen (Schramm), Chapter Die
Vorbereitungen einer eigenen Offensive zwischen Monschau and
Echternach.
Pagae 449
Soviet Union. The Japanese continued
such efforts to the day when Hitler appears to have made the
decision to attack in the Ardennes. Late in 1943, Hitler himself is
reported to have sounded out the Western Allies for a definition of
the unconditional surrender formula. But Allied insistence upon
these terms before and after the 20 July 1944 plot all but ruled out
the possibility of ending the war by negotiation. [10]
Unconditional surrender would have been
difficult even for a German democratic government after a sucessful
overthrow of Hitler's dictatorship. Certainly the "greatest captain
of all times," as the Fuehrer liked to be referred to, was the last
person to admit that Germany's situation was hopeless. Even after
the Ardennes offensive had failed, Hitler, on 28 December,
addressing the generals who were to lead a subsidiary attack in
Alsace, pointed out that the war was an ideological conflict that
could only end in Germany's victory or extinction. "By no means," he
said, "am I entertaining the thought that the war could be lost. I
have never in my life known the term capitulation..." [11]
If capitulation was wholly unacceptable
to him, Hitler could only pursue the alternative of continuing the
war with the vague hope that the unfavorable course of events could
be eventually reversed by determination, perseverance, and time.
Arguing that a period of grave military defeats was inopportune for
political decisions, he resolved to "continue this struggle unitl,
as Frederick the Great said, one of our 'damned enemies give up.'
Only then shall we get a peace that will guarantee the future
existence of the German nation." [12]
After the period of victorious blitz
campaigns had ended in the disastrous defeats in Stalingrad and
Tunisia in 1943, Hitler's exuberant optimism changed to the almost
mesmeric belief that he could be the winner of a long drawn-out
struggle in which one of his enemies would weary and give up. Only
the fittest would win this struggle for survival and unless the
German people could qualify they deserved
[10] (1) Cordell Hull, The Memoirs
of Cordell Hull, 2 vols. (New York: The Macmillan Company,
1948), Vol. II, pp. 1, 573-74. (2) Franz Von Papen, Der Wahrheit
eine Gasse (Muenchen: Paul List, 1952) p. 585. (The English
edition as published by Andre Deutsch, London, 1952.) (3) For
additional information see MS # R 27-German's Situation in the Fall
of 1944, Part I, The Political Situation, by Charles V. P. von
Luttichau.
[11] Hitler addressing commanding generals before the Operation
NORDWIND, 28 Dec 44, Fragment No. 27, in collection known as
Conferences Between Hitler and Members of the German Amed Forces
High Command, December 1942-March 1945, referred to hereafter as
Minutes of Hitler Conferences.
[12] Conference Between Hitler and Generalleutnant Siegfried
Westphal and Generalleutnant Hans Krebs, 31 Aug 44, Fragment No. 46,
in Minutes of Hitler Conferences.
Page 450
extinction. Toward the end of the war
this nihilistic attitude completely overshadowed all his plans and
decisions. [13]
Forced into the defense on all fronts,
Hitler still refused to subscribe to a purely defensive strategy and
continued to think in terms of an offensive. Like Clausewitz, he
maintained that offense is the best defense. But at the same time he
violated the principle that successful defense requires preservation
of strength, which in turn is possible only if space can be traded
for time. In 1944 Hitler was fast running out of both. This
consideration, perhaps, precipitated the decision to attack in the
Ardennes, for to persist in the "rot of barren defense" (to use
Hitler's words) would merely aggravate Germany's position, a
statement General Alfred Jodl amplified: "We could not hope to
escape the evil fate hanging over us. By fighting, rather than
waiting, we might save something." [14]
Once Hitler had made the decision to go
over to the offensive at any cost, he had to decide next whether to
wait until he could throw into an all-out effort the whole remaining
war potential of the nation and its Wehrmacht. This course of
action, proposed in separate plans to Hitler by military and
civilian advisers, amounted to a radical revision of strategy. The
offensive would have carried the punch of the combined forces of
total mobilization of Germany's economy and armed might with a grand
effort of the Luftwaffe's fighter arm concentrated around a core of
the dreaded jet planes now ready in limited numbers and steadily
multiplying. The next offensive strategy would have confronted the
Allies with a danger that they feared.
This alternative to an immediate throw
of the dice was the essence of a plan advanced by the Chief of the
Armed Forces Operations Staff, General Jodl and his deputy, General
Horst von Buttlar-Brandenfels. They proposed to: (1) shift the main
effort of the war to the West; (2) redeploy a considerable number of
divisions from Scandinavia and Italy, authorizing large-scale
withdrawals on these fronts; (3) transfer the bulk of Navy and
Luftwaffe personnel to the Army; (4) convert the entire replacement
army (about two million men), including all training units, into
combat divisions; (5) totally mobilize all German resources far
beyond the measures adopted in the July crisis; and (6) turn Germany
into a fortress under martial law. [15]
[13] Trial of the Major War
Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg 14
November 1945-1 October 1946, (Nuremberg, 1948), Vol. XVI, p.
498.
[14] (1) ETHINT 50 (Jodl), in OCMH files. (2) Fragment No. 27, cited
above, n. 11. (3) Hitler addressing commanding generals before the
Ardennes offensive, 12 Dec 44, Fragment No. 28, in Minutes of
Hitler Conferences.
[15] (1) MS # T-122, The History of OB WEST (Commander in Chief
West) (Generalleutnant Bodo Zimmermann et al.), Section D,
pp. 329ff. This section was written by General von Buttlar and gives
an account of the development of the plan for the Ardennes
offensive. (2) MS # P-32i, Ardennes Project, Questionnaire No. 1
(General der Infantrie Hans von Greiffenberg et al.).
Page 451
To supplement such a course of action
Hitler might have accepted the separate proposal submitted by War
Production Minister Albert Speer and General Galland: to strike a
devastating blow at Allied daylight bombers with the massed strength
of 2,500 fighters (including the jets) trained and assembled
expressly for that purpose. Their estimate was that 400 to 500
Allied bombers could thus be destroyed for the loss of an equal
number of German fighters and that an air victory of such
proportions would break the stranglehold of the air blockade. [16]
While there can be no doubt that
adoption of these proposals in combination and their application in
a great ground and air offensive could not have prevented the final
collapse of Germany, their effect on Allied strategy would have been
grave. But Hitler was perhaps too apprehensive, certainly too
impatient, to adopt this radical solution. He had never fully
grasped the significance of air power, even during the early phase
of the war when the Luftwaffe was victorious in the East and West.
Now, as the conflict entered the sixth year, the decline of
Goering's Luftwaffe had been painfully demonstrated. Hitler was
disillusioned and distrustful of his air force's capacity to deliver
the stroke Speer and Galland proposed and frustrated the plan even
before it could be tested. Nor did the Jodl-Buttlar-Brandenfels
proposal appeal to Hitler at this time. Six months later, after the
Russian armies had penetrated the heart of the Reich, he was finally
ready to apply extreme measures, but in the fall of 1944 Hitler was
evidently unwilling to admit that the seriousness of the situation
called for such a radical course. There is evidence that Hitler
considered withdrawing troops from the northern and southern
theaters of war, even to the extent of pulling back behind the Alps
and giving up Italy altogether in order to redeploy these divisions
in the west. But this was at the end of July, at the height of the
crisis in Normandy, and the thought then tentatively weighed was
subsequently allowed to die. [17]
In rejecting the radical proposals for
an all-out offensive, Hitler thus settled for a strategic
compromise.
The question now arose as to where to
launch the offensive on which he had decided. Initially Hitler's
military advisers explored all theaters of operations for
possibilities. But the criterion that the offensive must gain a
decisive success automatically reduced the choice to the theaters in
the East and West. [18]
General Guderian, responsible for
operations on the Eastern Front,
[16] See sources cited n. 6, above.
[17] Hitler Conference, 31 Jul 44, cited above, n. 2.
[18] (1) See n. 15(1), above. (2) Der Westen (Schramm).
Page 452
continually urged that the strategic
reserve be sent to his theater to thwart any Soviet attempt to
invade the German homeland. In October Guderian's fears were vividly
illustrated by Soviet drives that cut off an army group in the
Courland peninsula and penetrated the East Prussia defenses. During
the same period the Russians had captured Belgrade and crossed the
natural barrier of the Danube on a wide front. By Christmas they
encircled Budapest and threatened Vienna. But Hitler refused to
listen to the counsel of the Army's Chief of Staff and ridiculed
intelligence estimates of Soviet strength and capabilities. [19]
In the beginning of August Hitler and
his staff actually considered a carefully prepared operation in the
East, while planning to fight a defensive battle with their backs to
the Siegfried Line. These plans were based upon the assumption that
the withdrawal from France could be effected gradually with
successive stands to be made along prepared defense positions well
ahead of the West Wall. After a victory over the Russians, the
forces could then be shifted to the West with a view to repeating
the exploit against the Western Allies. This hope faded rapidly as
the Allied armies swept relentlessly across France driving the
remnants of the German armies in the West before them. Concurrently
the high-level planners realized that the Soviet Union's apparently
inexhaustible manpower reserves and its advantage of unlimited
terrain would frustrate German efforts to gain a strategic decision
in the East. [20]
Explaining his position after the war,
General Jodl stated that the attack had to be launched "in the West
because the Russians had so many troops that even if we had
succeeded in destroying thirty divisions it would have made no
difference. On the other hand, if we destroyed thirty divisions in
the West, it would amount to more than one third of the whole
invasion army. [21] Actually this would have been almost one half of
the Allied Expeditionary Force.
This consideration tipped the scales in
favor of the West and coincided with Hitler's firm conviction that
Germany's fate would be decided there. The geographical limits of
the area-as compared to the endlessness of the USSR-and the far
smaller number of Allied units would give him the chance he was
seeking. A major factor in this connection was Hitler's view that
the leadership of the West would waver under the impact of a massive
crisis, and that public opinion, especially in the United States,
would demand a withdrawal from Europe. [22]
[19] MS # R-l9, cited above, n. 4.
[20] See sources cited n. 15, above.
[21] ETHINT 50 (Jodl).
[22] See sources cited n. 15, above.
Page 453
Once the theater had been determined,
the Armed Forces Operations Staff planners investigated feasible
courses of action, bearing in mind Hitler's strategic objectives,
available German forces (amounting to thirty divisions), and Allied
strength and capabilities. An important factor was the realization
that Allied control of the air could no be broken by the Luftwaffe
and had to be countered by other means.
Hitler specified the prerequisites that
would ensure success: (1) holding the positions in the West against
all Allied breakthrough attempts without committing the forces being
assembled for the big offensive; (2) achieving complete tactical
surprise; (3) a period of bad weather extending for at least ten
days to keep Allied air grounded during the initial phase of the
operation; (4) speedy exploitation of the breakthrough; (5) a
relatively quiet period on other fronts, especially in the East.
[23]
German intelligence methodically
evaluated Allied strength and capabilities. In September the Germans
estimated that General Eisenhower's forces in France numbered sixty
divisions with five more to be shipped to the Continent in October.
It was a slight consolation to the German planners that their
intelligence had failed to turn up any strategic reserves available
to the Supreme Commander at this time. Allied main effort sectors
were recognized in the Aachen area, where the Allies were expected
to aim at closing to the Rhine on a broad front north of Cologne,
and at Metz, where the objective was evidently the Saar Basin.
Despite a relative shortage of ammunition, the Germans credited the
Allied armies with the capability of launching and sustaining
large-scale offensives. The numerical strength ratio between Allied
and German forces was estimated at two to one. While Navy
intelligence was still fearful of an amphibious landing in the area
of the Ems estuary, Army intelligence discounted this possibility as
well as that of a repetition of an airborne landing similar to the
one launched at Arnhem. [24]
On the basis of these considerations
the Germans weighed five possible courses of action to realize
Hitler's intention: (1) Operation Holland, consisting of a
single-thrust attack to be launched from the bridgehead of Venlo
with the objective Antwerp; (2) Operation Liege-Aachen, a
double envelopment with the main effort originating in the area of
northern Luxembourg, driving through the Ardennes in a northwesterly
direction, then turning north to meet a secondary attack launched
simultaneously from the area northwest of Aachen with the objective
of destroying the Allied forces in that salient; (3) Operation
Luxembourg,
[23] MS # R-12, cited above, n. 9.
[24] Ibid.
Page 454
a two-pronged attack from central
Luxembourg and the area of Metz with the objective Longvy; (4)
Operation Lorraine; and (5) Operation Alsace, envelopment
operations aimed at gaining Nancy and Vesoul, respectively.
The range of choice was soon reduced to
the first two solutions because they offered the best prospect of a
decisive success. From a strategic point of view Operation
Holland was very tempting, but was recognized to contain an
element of grave risk. The second course, Liege-Aachen, which
was later to become known as the "small solution," appeared more
likely to succeed. [25]
Faced with these two alternatives,
Hitler reached the momentous decision of combining them in what von
Runstedt, student of von Schlieffen, sarcastically characterized as
an operational idea that could "almost" be called a stroke of
genius. With this "big solution," however, Hitler gave the offensive
two objectives to be attained with a force adequate only for one.
Some of the reasons behind this
decision were tactical, others were psychological and find their
explanation only in Hitler's personality. The tactical
considerations that he regarded as favorable were: (1) the
opportunity to slice through the Allied front along its national
seam, thus adding to expected military crisis the cumulative effect
of anticipated political disunion; (2) the strategic and
psychological importance of Antwerp, seemingly within reach of a
bold thrust, if speedily executed; (3) the weakness of the Allied
dispositions in the Ardennes sector inviting repetition of the
classic breakthrough victories in 1914 and 1940; and (4) the
suitability of the wooded Eifel for concealing a large-scale
build-up and achieving surprise. Hitler had persuaded himself that
he could assemble an adequate force to execute the offensive. He was
determined to carry out the operation in the face of powerful Allied
attacks astride Metz and the imminent thrust toward the Ruhr
district. Distasteful as it was to him to give up valuable terrain
and laboriously build defense positions, Hitler was willing to
sacrifice both if he could thus hold intact the attack forces he was
concentrating. A dangerously grave element in the structure of
Hitler's consideration was the gross underestimation of Allied
strength and determination and, conversely, an exaggerated
overrating of the power and effectiveness of his own forces,
especially the elite SS panzer divisions. [26] The overriding
psychological incitement, however, for
[25] (1) Ibid. (2) Der Westen
(Schramm), p. 259. (3) See sources cited n. 15, above.
[26] For a fuller discussion of Hitler's reasoning, see (1) MS #
R-12, cited above, n. 9; (2) MS # R-13, The Ardennes Offensive,
Planning and Preparations, Ch. II, The Framework for the Operation
WACHT AM RHEIN, by Charles V. P. von Luttichau.
Page 455
undertaking the venture of a great
counteroffensive was Hitler's recurring delusion that his military
genius would permit him to regain the initiative and decisively
alter the course of the war. [27]
Proponents of the "small solution" (the
Liege-Aachen operation), mainly Field Marshals von Rundstedt
and Walter Model, based their objections to Hitler's concept on the
following considerations: (1) the paucity of forces available for an
objective so ambitious; (2) the serious lack of reserves to hold the
shoulders and feed the offensive; (3) the uncertainty that the
forces Hitler had promised could be held in reserve until the start
of the offensive, in view of the impending resumption of Allied
attacks; and (4) the conviction that the offensive, as planned by
Hitler, would result only in a bulge in the German lines and not in
the destruction of sizable Allied forces. [28]
Hitler categorically rejected all pleas
in favor of the "small solution," and in his operation directive of
10 November marked the distant objective of Antwerp and even the
disposition of the attack forces as "unalterable." To get what he
wanted, he freely disregarded the counsel of his advisers and
commanders, staking everything on what General Jodl later called "an
act of desperation." [29]
The mission of the operation, decreed
by Hitler, was "to destroy the enemy forces north of the line
Antwerp-Brussels-Luxembourg, thus to achieve a decisive turn of the
Campaign in the West, and possibly of the entire war." (See Map
10.) The Commander in Chief West (von Runstedt) was ordered to
break through the weakly held front of the U.S. First Army between
Monschau and Wasserbillig with Army Group B (Model), cross
the Meuse between Liege and Dinant, seize Antwerp and the western
bank of the Schelde estuary, and destroy the Allied forces thus cut
off from their lines of supply, and, in conjunction with this main
attack, launch strong elements of the adjoining Army Group H
in a supporting attack from the north.
In the main attack with Field Marshal
Model's Army Group B, the Sixth Panzer Army (with four
armored and four infantry divisions) was to break through the Allied
front north of the Schnee Eifel, seize undestroyed Meuse crossings
astride Liege in co-operation with the 150th Panzer Brigade
(SS Col. Otto Skorzeny, famed for his exploit of having freed
Mussolini), and subsequently close to the Albert Canal between
Maastricht and Antwerp (inclusive). To cover its right (northern)
flank, the panzer army would seize and hold defense positions
[27] (1) Operation Directive, WACHT
AM RHEIN, 10 Nov 44, by Hitler in OB WEST, KTB Anlage 50,
1 Jul-31 Dec 44, Vol. I, pp. 95-104. (2) ETHINT 50 Jodl).
[28] Ibid.
[29] (1) ETHINT 50 (Jodl). (2) MS # P-032i (Greiffenberg et al.).
The comments by Albert Speer bear out the fact that Hitler was fully
aware of the desperate gamble he had undertaken.
Page 456
[Map 10]
Page 457
along the Vesdre River with the bulk of
its infantry divisions and artillery.
Army Group B's center force, the
Fifth Panzer Army (with four armored and four infantry
divisions), was to use as its main axis of advance the road
Bastogne-Namur, break through the Allied front in northern
Luxembourg, and cross the Meuse between Amay and Namur. Advanced
elements were to rush into the area around Brussels and that west of
Antwerp to protect the Sixth Panzer Army's open western flank
on the line Antwerp-Brussels-Dinant. To fulfill this task, the
Fifth Panzer Army would stay abreast of its right neighbor-the
Sixth Panzer Army-and disregard its own extended left flank.
The Seventh Army (with one
armored and five infantry divisions) was given the task of
protecting the southern and southwestern flank of the operation and
gaining defense positions starting south of Dinant along the Semois
River and ending astride Luxembourg City. This army's forceful
advance was to gain the time and terrain essential to build up
strong defense positions farther to the rear.
In a supporting attack from the north,
the Fifteenth Army-reassigned for the offensive from Army
Group H to Army Group B-had a dual mission. With three
armored and six infantry divisions it was to launch holding attacks
between Roermond and Eupen to tie down Allied forces in that sector
and ultimately destroy them in a secondary attack. In addition, the
Fifteenth Army had the task of assuming control over those
units of the Sixth Panzer Army committed in the defensive
position along the Vesdre River, after the mobile elements of the
Sixth Panzer Army had crossed the Meuse.
The reserve was reckoned at three
armored and four infantry divisions.
Hitler directed von Runstedt to
complete the concentration by the end of November-a date dictated by
weather forecasts. The necessary fuel (four million gallons) and
ammunition (fifty trainloads from the sacrosanct Fuehrer reserve),
above and beyond the current needs of the theater, were promised.
The Luftwaffe, Hitler assured his commanders, would support the
attack of the ground forces with 1,500 fighters including 100 jets.
[30]
This was Hitler's original concept put
into a directive. Except for the number and effective strength of
units, it remained virtually unchanged until the offensive began on
the morning of 16 December 1944.
On the eve of his offensive Hitler
could point with satisfaction to the fulfillment of the basic
prerequisites he had specified when he had
[30] See sources cited n. 27, above.
Page 458
ordered the attack. The Western Front
had withstood Allied breakthrough attempts at Aachen and in
Lorraine, although nine panzer and an equal number of infantry
divisions had been drawn into battle and suffered in varying
degrees. Secrecy had been preserved, the weather was favorable, and
the front in the East except for the sector in Hungary had remained
relatively quiet. A tremendous effort had gone into the planning and
preparations for Germany's last offensive. As the grenadiers and
panzers moved into their jump-off positions, expectation was high,
and success appeared within close reach.
The Consequences of
the Ardennes Decision
Almost immediately the operation fell
short of the high hopes that had been attached to it. On the third
day Hitler canceled the subsidiary attack of the Fifteenth Army
and thus altered the tactical concept of the operation. The double
envelopment was thus reduced to a far less effective single thrust.
On the fourth day it was evident that the powerful Sixth Panzer
Army would be unable to break through the Allied lines and that
the distant objective of Antwerp could not be reached. After one
week had passed, even the prospect of closing to the Meuse had
faded. When General Patton's armor broke through to Bastogne on 26
December the battle was reduced to a fight for that city, and it was
clear that the offensive had failed altogether. [31]
For the Germans the Ardennes did not
officially end until 28 January, when Field Marshal Model's armies
had been forced back to their original jump-off positions. They
could claim to have drawn into the battle 29 U.S. and 4 British
divisions and to have inflicted on them about 75,000 casualties.
[32] The offensive had achieved a temporary respite though Hitler
now referred to it as "a tremendous easing of the situation." [33]
The Allies had been forced to abandon their attacks on the Roer dams
and the Saar, and to delay their final offensive toward the Rhine
River for two months. But even Hitler had to admit that it had not
gained "the decisive success that might have been expected." [34]
For this modest achievement, compared to the ambitious aim, Hitler
had paid an exorbitant price. Exact figures are not available, but
reliable estimates indicate that German casualties were in the
neighborhood of 100,000 men (about one third of the attacking
[31] For the various dates when the
Ardennes offensive was considered to have failed, see MSS # R-11 and
R-15, Key Dates During the Ardennes Offensive 1944, Parts I and II,
by Magna E. Bauer and Charles V. P. von Luttichau.
[32] Pogue, The Supreme Command, pp. 396-97.
[33] Fragment No. 27, 28 Dec 44, in Minutes of Hitler Conferences.
[34] Ibid.
Page 459
force); at least 800 tanks (out of over
2,000 employed); and about 1,000 planes (about half of the total
fighter force assembled, including almost 300 lost in the "Big
Strike" against Allied ground installations delivered on 2 January
1945). [35]
These losses were irreplaceable. They
left the Western theater of operations with no appreciable fuel
reserves. Ammunition stockpiles were down to one third of estimated
needs. Replacements for the casualties suffered could no longer be
expected. The Ardennes had hurt the Allies, but, in the words of von
Runstedt's historian, it had literally "broken the backbone of the
(German) western front." [36]
Long before the official end of the
offensive in the West, the full impact of the strategic consequences
of the Ardennes was felt in the East. The weakness of the 1,500-mile
Eastern Front is best illustrated by the fact that almost half of
the German divisions were either isolated in the north (on the
Courland peninsula in Latvia) or tied down in the south (in Hungary)
without a chance to influence the outcome of the impending battle in
the center. When the Russians struck on 12 January 1945, it was too
late for remedial measures. The reinforcements and supplies that for
the past four months had consistently gone to the West and into the
Ardennes had been spent in the short-lived Battle of the Bulge,
while the Russians gained an awesome bulge of far greater
permanence. They swept across Poland, captured almost all of East
Prussia, drove deep into Silesia, and, finally, came to a halt less
than fifty miles short of Berlin. Hitler's desperate gamble in the
West had invited disaster in the East and hastened the final and
inevitable defeat of Germany.
[35] For discussion of German losses
see MS # R-60, The Cost of the
Ardennes Offensive, by Magna E. Bauer.
[36] MS # T-122 (Zimmermann et al.).
Charles V. P. von Luttchau, Historian
with OCMH since 1951. Graduate student, Universities of Berlin and
Munich; M. A., American University. Lecturer: Army War College.
German Air Force, World War II. Author: Narratives in support of
volumes in UNITED STATES ARMY IN WORLD WAR II; various articles in
military journals.