The direct military value of eavesdropping on German Staff officers may have been limited. Far more successful was the activity directed against junior officers and NCOs of the Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine. These leaked a wealth of secret information about new weapons, operational tactics, radio and radar equipment of great value for Allied front troops.[74] The indirect gain, however, was enormous, for the British obtained intimate insight into the Wehrmacht, whose organisations, structure and personalities were now known to the minutest detail. The German prisoners also spoke openly about situation analyses, enabling the British to discover a great deal about how the Germans saw the overall strategic situation.
Social Profile of the Staff Officers
Not all officers who were at Trent Park speak in the published transcripts. From April 1945 CSDIC (UK) recorded far fewer conversations, and for reasons of space here a selection has had to be made to provide a broad spectrum of very senior officers with a spread of character types and biographies. Sixty-three generals, 14 Obristen (colonels), four Oberstleutnante, three majors and two lieutenants appear in the protocols. Most of the 86 were Army officers, 11 were Luftwaffe, four Kriegsmarine and one Waffen SS.
The predominant group at Trent Park was the 63 generals. These divide by rank into Generaloberst – 1, General – 8, Generalleutnant – 23 and Generalmajor – 23. The British were therefore listening-in to the second layer at the top of the Wehrmacht command structure. At first glance it is a reasonably heterogeneous group. At one end of the scale is 56-year-old Generalmajor Alfred Gutknecht, whose social background was the Kaiserreich and who since 1939 had held only administrative posts; at the other the youngest divisional comander of the German land forces, highly decorated SS-Brigadeführer Kurt Meyer, 34 years old, who since 1939 had been at the front in the thick of the fighting. The breadth of the band is what makes the protocols especially valuable, making it possible to see how differing social circumstances and war experiences had a bearing on the content of conversations.
The generals were all born in the years between 1882 and 1910, but the majority (24 generals) were born in 1894–95. The religion is known in only two-thirds of cases: the relationship of 41 Protestants to 10 Catholics may possibly represent the religious split of the whole group. All regions of the 1914 German Reich feature amongst the places of birth, although the majority of officers were Prussian born.[75] Most of the generals came from upper-class origins, although only 18 were actually of noble birth plus three amongst the lower officer ranks. Only eight of the 63 generals had seen long service with the General Staff.
Kroener[76] suggests that the social profile and make-up of the Wehrmacht officer corps should be distributed in the following manner:
– General Staff officer of WWI
– Front officer of WWI
– Reichswehr officers without war experience
– Soldiers trained before September 1939 but who became officers in wartime.
The generals should be grouped into those who rose to general rank:
– before September 1939
– between 1939 and 1943
– from 1944 onwards.
Following this system, it will be seen that almost all 63 generals served at the front in WWI and were appointed to the rank of general between 1939 and 1945 (one prior to 1939, 52 between 1939 and 1943, 10 between 1944 and 1945). Put another way, the military career path of the majority was generally similar until the outbreak of war in 1939. In WWI they had served at the front as young officers, most of them being senior lieutenants and company commanders at its conclusion: they were then accepted into the Reichswehr and by the outbreak of war in 1939 were as a rule regimental commanders. For further progress technical qualifications and especially achievement at the front were decisive. Of the 33 officers born in 1894–96, six were of the rank of Oberst when captured, 12 Generalmajor, 12 Generalleutnant and four General. Only two of the 63 continued into the West German Bundeswehr.
Experiences in World War II differed widely: whilst one group had made a career at the front, the other ‘also served’ behind the lines. The decorations awarded highlight the division as according to fighting experience. Of the total of 86 officers, 48 had awards for bravery, 26 wore the Knight’s Cross (of whom five had the Oak Leaves, two the Swords and one the Diamonds), 13 had as the highest award for bravery, the German Cross in Gold. In other words, nearly all very senior officers who had been at the front over a long period were decorated. If a general lacked a decoration it was a sure sign either that he had not been at the front long, or that he had been on a quiet section of front, or had not proved his fighting abilities adequately, or he had served at a front base where little opportunity presented itself for distinguished activity.[77] Thus the undecorated general had as a rule experienced a different war to one who had won the Knight’s Cross.
The question may be posed whether the protocols, at least for the generals appointed between 1939 and 1943, are representative. The great diversity of careers appears to suggest this conclusion at first glance, but the material does not lend itself to judgements about the group.
Neither age, rank, branch of service, regional origin nor religion indicate whether a man was likely to have attached himself to the pro-or anti-Nazi clique. Political leaning was personal to the officer, in combination with front experience. Living through a military disaster might lead to extensive reflection on politics, strategy and the character of the National Socialist system. The ‘Napoleon winter’ before Moscow in 1941, the catastrophe at Stalingrad, the defeat in Tunisia or the struggle in Normandy left many with a critical view of the leadership and the Nazi State. Such an experience was not necessarily a precondition for an anti-Nazi stance. General der Panzertruppe Heinrich Eberbach had never been a Party member, but was considered before his capture to be a convinced National Socialist, ‘brave, loyal and firm’, according to Guderian. He spent almost the entire war in the FührerReserve or as a field-commander in France. He experienced no great defeats, but at Trent Park spoke out against the war and Nazism. CSDIC (UK) held Eberbach to be ‘a strong personality with clear opinions’ who now believed that the Nazi regime was a criminal organisation and so no longer considered himself bound by his oath of allegiance.
3. The Main Subjects of Discussion
3.1 Politics, Stategy and the Different Camps at Trent Park
When Wilhelm Ritter von Thoma arrived at Trent Park in November 1942, the only other inmate was Ludwig Crüwell, captured five months previously. Both were of about the same age, highly decorated and each had commanded a panzer division on the Eastern Front and in 1942 with the Afrika Korps. The first evening they sat up talking until 2 a.m. Further long conversations followed in the next few days. After a week the first differences of opinion made themselves felt. Crüwell accused Thoma of being ‘negative’. ‘Frankly,’ Crüwell said, ‘talking to you, one gets the impression that you accept all the criticisms of Greater Germany, and that if it had been left to you from the very beginning, everything would have been done so much better.’[78] From the outset, Thoma had condemned the overall situation because the economic resources of the Allies were increasing while those of the Axis powers were diminishing. He had criticised the decision to attack the Soviet Union,[79] denigrated Hitler and the Party,[80] described in drastic terms dreadful German war crimes committed in Russia (Document 83) and reported on the programme by which the Jews were to have been removed from Europe by the end of 1942. It was a ‘tragedy of obedience’[81] that German soldiers had gone along with the National Socialist regime. They had let too much go unchallenged, said von Thoma. Of course, no general could simply rebel by himself but the three C-in-Cs could have acted jointly against the outgrowth of the National Socialist State, particularly at the time of the Fritsch affair.[82]
75
So far as can be determined, there were only ever three Austrians at Trent Park: Konter-Admiral Paul Meixner, Oberstleutnant Johann Kogler and Oberstleutnant Wilfried von Mueller-Rienzburg.
76
Kroener, ‘Strukturelle Veränderungen’. For the whole context see also Stumpf, ‘Wehrmacht-Elite’.
77
Only two generals who served within the Reich or occupied territories received a high decoration: Generalmajor Wahle the rarely awarded Knight’s Cross of the War Service Cross with Swords, and Generalmajor Krug the German Cross in Silver.
78
The first long conversation, lasting into the early hours of 21.11.1942, was harmonious except for a difference of opinion on Thoma’s attitude to National Socialism. SRM 99, 20.11.1942 and SRM 127, 26.11.1942, TNA WO 208/4136.
79
Thoma’s attitude was already clear from a conversation he had with Air Vice-Marshall Conrad Collier during the flight from Cairo to Gibraltar. TNA PREM 3/363/3, SRM 179, 20.11.1942, TNA WO 208/4136.
80
A typical outburst of rage by Thoma is documented in SRX 1610, 28.2.1943, TNA WO 208/4162.
82
SRM 82, 20.11.1942, similar statements in SRM 102, 21.11.1942; SRX 1422, 26.12.1942; GRGG 179, 24.8.1944, all TNA WO 208/4364 and SRX 1610, 28.2.1943, TNA WO 208/4162.