Tweeting is dangerous. After all, who needs to be limited to a maximum of 280 characters, can’t argue in a differentiated way. In this case, the hapless Ex-Secretary General of the CDU and current state Secretary in the Federal Ministry of defence is now tapped Peter Tauber.
On the 14. October, he recalled in the short message service of the death of General field Marshal Erwin Rommel in front of 74 years. Hitler had asked his former favorite officer to commit by poison suicide and to get a state funeral, or in front of the people’s court, and to be for high treason.
the reason is that The dictator suspected that Rommel was confidant in the coup preparations of the military resistance. The “desert Fox” famous tank General, who objected to Hitler on several occasions in military matters, and his commands had been disobeyed, chose suicide, not least in order to spare his wife and his son, the guilt by Association.
By Peter Tauber’s Tweet has now started a debate about whether Rommel was given his forced death as a victim of national socialism, memorable, or because of his previous role as a propaganda figure of the third Reich condemned.
The new tradition of adoption for the German armed forces, it is only since the end of March into effect in 2018, will also not help. Because it says on the one hand: “the armed forces of a democratic and legal state in the Wehrmacht, as an Institution, a tradition worthy of it.” A clear statement.
on the Other hand, it is stated: “The inclusion of individual members of the Wehrmacht in the Traditionsgut of the German armed forces is, in principle, possible. A prerequisite for an in-depth Individual analysis and careful thought.“
So, the question must be: How does an in-depth consideration of the case of Erwin Rommel? The outcome of a “careful Weighing” of his life and his mistakes?
the Unanimous opinion of the leading drum are experts of Germany, not historians. Peter Steinbach, for example, the scientific head of the German resistance memorial center in Berlin, is particularly interested in how and why Rommel again and again to the fascination of Hitler’s personality succumb to could. At the same time, Steinbach stresses of a new biography of the field Marshal, under the title of “Erwin Rommel. A German soldier“ is to show, that the General had been at least partly responsible for the criminal war practice of the Wehrmacht.
the Same source location Peter interprets Love from the centre for military history and social Sciences of the Bundeswehr, he notes that Rommel was to prove no concrete war crimes: neither personally committed nor from him, arranged misdeeds.
of Course, attesting to the Love for Rommel also a “personal proximity to the NS-Regime”, but at the same time, a significant “military genius”. Only both together allowed for Rommel’s “stellar career”.
The crucial question, namely, the ratio of the former favorite General of the resistance, tells of the ten years at the British military Academy Sandhurst-working German historian: “The General field Marshal is not the closest circle of the men of the 20th century. July attributable. At the same time, however, he was more than a mere sympathizer and paid for it with his life.“ His most recent research, says Peter Love, supported this five years ago for the first time formulated a judgment.
The historian and history, and journalist Ralf Georg Reuth, finally, had been written in 1987, the first critical Rommel-biography and of the on 23. October appears to be a new “Short history of the Second world war”, Rommel ambivalent: The General was “the product of his Generation” and the “way of Thinking and behavior of detained samples of the former military leadership”.
At the same time, Reuth stresses the “the people own inadequacies, its contradictions, but also its dreams and illusions, his Temptation and self-deception”. He comes to in his laconic summarization convincing judgment: “as a prototype of the German tragedy, is reflected in the Person of Rommel’s – to be the’ leaders ‘ of the humiliated Nation reflected their self-respect, into the Ruin followed, and to have it believed, to do nothing more than a duty.”
All three experts give for their judgments of good arguments. As so often in the debate about the past, there is no one, indisputable truth. Therefore, the figure of Erwin Rommel evades the quick judgment, the tapered treatment on a mostly useless, often even counterproductive Medium such as Twitter.
you will find “world history” on Facebook. We are happy about a Like.