СС-Ягдфербанд "Ост". SS-Jagdverband OST

Ну вот такая вот статья по юниту в Латвии.....

Björn Michael Felder
[FONT=Arial Narrow,Arial Narrow][FONT=Arial Narrow,Arial Narrow]SS Jagdverband Ost (1944–1945): A Case Study

Historical writings about collaboration in Latvia during World War II are very rare. In comparison with research on the Holocaust in Latvia there is not much research done on this phenomenon yet. The purpose of this paper is to focus on the SS Jagd-verband Ost on the one hand as an instance of Latvian collaboration, but on the other hand also in the perspective of historical continuity. The paper will have a look at the prehistory and history of this military formation, its duties and aims as well as at its personnel and the ways of motivation and biographies of these people.
In late summer 1944 the German Reichssicherheitshauptamt established a Latvian military unit with exclusive Latvian staff whose aim was to create a Latvian underground and partisan organization in case of a Soviet reoccupation of Latvia. Subordination to the SS Jagdverbände was ordered by the Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler only on 1 October 1944.1 The project’s name was “Wildkatze – Mežakaķis” (Wild Cat).2 But the history of the Wild Cat project had been dated back longer. Actually there had been several local branches of the SS Jagdverbände, e.g. North, West and South.3 The Wild Cat project became part of the SS Jagdverband Ost (East) and was later called also SS Jagdeinsatz Baltikum4 or SS Jagdeinsatz Ostland.5
It was the task of the SS Jagdverbände to execute plans of German secret services for guerilla warfare at the eastern front. This large project seemed to be the last attempt to delay German defeat.6 Participants of this large guerilla-project were from the Wehrmacht as well as from the Sicherheitsdienst (SD – Security Service). General Reinhard Gehlen, commander of the Fremde Heere Ost (Alien Armies East), the newly established intelligence service of the German army, was one of those participants. Of the SS joined in SS Sturmbannführer Erich Hengelhaupt with his Unternehmen Zeppelin (Operation Zeppelin), a German trial to copy Soviet partisans by parachuting Russian POWs in the rear of the Soviet troops.7 Another actor was his SD colleague, SS Obersturmbannführer Otto Skor-zeny, Mussolini-liberator and commander of the SD special force [FONT=Arial Narrow,Arial Narrow][FONT=Arial Narrow,Arial Narrow]Sonderverbände
Friedenthal z.b.V. [FONT=Arial Narrow,Arial Narrow][FONT=Arial Narrow,Arial Narrow]Both were subordinated to Walter Schellenberg, chief of the intelligence branch of the SD counter-intelligence, the [/FONT]SD-Abwehr[FONT=Arial Narrow,Arial Narrow][FONT=Arial Narrow,Arial Narrow]. Skorzeny became commander of the SS Jagdverbände in October 1944. The aims of the SS Jagdverbände had been described as the following: firstly, to perform special combat operations behind enemy lines, e. g. sabotage and, secondly, to establish, initiate or support anti-Soviet resistance in the east, as it was told to all German commanders at all front lines in October 1944.[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial Narrow,Arial Narrow][FONT=Arial Narrow,Arial Narrow]8 [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial Narrow,Arial Narrow][FONT=Arial Narrow,Arial Narrow]One example of the work of the SS Jagdverbände was the support of the Ukrainian UPA, which was supported with weapons, instructors and even troops. Best known are probably the special combat task in US uniforms at the Ardennes in December 1944. But the Wild Cat was the only case of an exclusive all-Latvian or rather an autochthone formation initiated by German intelligence service. It can be considered as the pilot project of the German guerilla warfare.
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

 

The prehistory of the Wild Cat began already in spring 1944 with the Līdumnieks (pioneer) organization, a camouflaged branch of Rīga SD, which started spreading National-socialistic ideology all over Latvia. Rudolf Lange, commander of the secret service and security police Ostland,9 intended the local groups of this Līdumnieks organization as a possible reserve of partisans.10 The real work on the Wild Cat project started in June 1944 with the arrival of Boriss Jankavs, its Latvian commander, in Rīga. By starting work in the Rīga SD, he founded a “centre of Latvian national partisans.”11 The centre was subordinated to the local branch of the Operation Zeppelin under the command of SS Sturmbannführer Otto Kraus at that time. Since October 1944 the headquarters of the SS Jagdverbände were located in Oranienburg near Berlin. The German supervisor of the Wild Cat became SS Sturmbannführer Dr. Manfred Pechau, who had served as an officer at the SD Einsatzkommando 2 and later for the Operation Zeppelin in the north-west of Russia. This centre worked out plans for the partisan organiz-ation named Latvijas Nacionālo partizānu organizācija (Latvian National Partisan Organization, LNPO). In August and September 1944 the first partisan groups were already left behind or parachuted mainly to Vidzeme.12 Also depots of weapons, ammunition and other equipment were put into these areas. The Latvian personnel for these operations were taken on the one hand from German secret services, who supported this partisan-centre and who were monitoring these actions, and on the other hand from local police, Aizsargi, local administrations (pagastvecākie) and also from the Latvian SS Legion. Captured deserters were especially “motivated” to join the unit to undo their punishment.
On withdrawal of the German troops from Rīga in October 1944, the partisan-centre found itself located in Kurland and continued its efforts. The strategy 223
was the same as before: to establish networks all over Kurland, using personal and official connections to military and civil institutions and organizations like the following: local police, Aizsargi, local administration, Latvian youth organization (Latvijas Jaunatnes organizācija), the Latvian staff of the Latvian SS Legion, even directly to Rūdolfs Bangerskis, but also to single Latvian frontline officers. The SS Jagdverband Ost was also enclosed in the plans of the Latvian National Committee by Colonel Roberts Osis in the beginning of May 1945 and was seen as its armed forces. These networks were planned as the basement of the future partisan organization.

 

After consolidation of the German army in the bridgehead of Kurland, the SS Jagdverband was also forced to take part in police and military actions in autumn 1944. It had to join forces with the SS and the Wehrmacht in the anti-partisan warfare. For this purpose Jankavs established the so-called Jagdkommandos, closed units with about 50 soldiers per unit. Since October 1944 there had been at least 12 Jagdkommandos.13 Besides there had been created the so-called “local groups” – for police duties and especially for controlling rural areas. These groups firstly had to collect information for the information staff of the Jagdverband, secondly they had to fight against Soviet partisans and prepare postwar partisan warfare.14 These groups can be considered as the very end of German police-apparatus in Kurland. In some case they seemed to be a Latvian Volkssturm and Werwolf at the same time. Both Jagdkommandos and local groups were to become postwar anti-Soviet partisans.
Also important and most contradictory was the involvement of the SS Jagdverband in the liquidation of the Kurelis’ army, the military arm of the Latvian underground movement Latvian Central Council (Latvijas Centrālā padome) in November 1944. Actually the staff of the Wild Cat had stayed in contact with Kurelis since August 1944. The Frontaufklärungstrupp 212, a special reconnaissance unit of the German army, equipped and trained Kurelis’ army as well as the SS Jagdverband. In November 1944, Jankavs was assigned by Friedrich Jeckeln, highest SS commander in Ostland, to work as a negotiator with the Kurelis’ staff.15 The Jagdverband also spied out Kurelis’ contacts to the west in Liepāja.16 Not yet verified is the participation of Jagdverband in combat activities against the Roberts Nikolajs Rubenis detachment near Lake Usma. Nevertheless it is known that Kurelis’ soldiers joined the Jagdverband after the liquidation of the army. Later the Jagdverband established connections to the Latvian Central Council and was seen as the successor of Kurelis and as a military force of the LCP in Kurland.17 Finally, the Jagdverband had looked at the Kurelis’ army as part of the partisan efforts, but these plans were stopped by Jeckeln.

 

The personal composition of the SS Jagdverband in Latvia was very heterogeneous and therefore contradictory. The Wild Cat project had about 2500 to 3000 members. By taking a look at the officers and staff members we can sort out several groups. At first there where a great number of former and long-served SD men like Jankavs. He made a real career in the Latvian branch of German Sicherheitspolizei. The son of an unskilled railwayworker, Jankavs started as a simple rank-and-file SS man, and he became a commander of the Jagdverband holding the rank of captain.18 Having joined the Arājs’ Commando with merely high-school education in July 1941, he was sent near the front at Leningrad as a “translator” in autumn 1941. Later he took part in the anti-partisan warfare under Pechau at Loknja and worked also for the Operation Zeppelin. Another example of SD collaborators is Rūdolfs Turks, who led a Latvian SD unit at Minsk in winter 1941/42 and who was involved in several massacres around this area.19 Within the Jagdverband he worked as an instructor and ended up as an emigrant in the USA.
There have been also former members of the Latvian police, the Aizsargi, the Latvian Legion and other non-military institutions. Quite remarkable are the former members of the Lettische Kartei or Sondergruppe R (Latvian card index).20 In spring 1944, they were released after one year of imprisonment with the intention to work for the Wild Cat project. They worked for Jankavs both forced and voluntary. The Latvian card index had collected information about Latvian communists and others for the SD from July 1941 to March 1943 under its commander, the Pērkonkrusts member and Selonija vicesenior Fēlikss Pēteris Rikards. The Latvian card index can be seen as the legal branch of the Pērkonkrusts organization, Latvian extreme right-wing movement, after their ban in August 1941. The agency’s personnel, like Teodors Jansons, Oskars Mitrevics or Freds Launags, consisted of people with academic education, who had been Pērkonkrusts members or their sympathizers for many years. They took part in the Latvian underground at the first Soviet occupation in 1940 and also during the German occupation. Their activities inside the Jagdverband can be described as a ”think tank” developing the guerilla infrastructure. For this purpose they used old connections of the resistance. They were in a real opposition to the SD-staff and were following their own nationalistic aims but still they can be called “collaborators”, who supported the duration of the NS regime in Latvia.
But how strong was the Jagdverband influence on the development of postwar national partisan networks in Latvia? Actually most of the groups were captured and the networks were soon disconnected by Soviet forces. Nevertheless some Jagdkommandos and local groups of the Jagdverband, like the groups of Bonzaks 225
or Feldbergs, joined the partisans after German capitulation.21 Jankavs fought as a partisan until January 1947, when he was arrested by the MVD. Also the former members of the Latvian card index were very active after the war. Certainly the percentage of former Jagdverband members within the partisans was very low. But we have to face the fact, that at least in Kurland the Jagdverband created a basement, a guerilla infrastructure, to absorb willing legionaries and others for partisan actions. Until 1947 most groups of Kurland partisans were included or close by connected to the Jagdverband successor LNPO or the Latvian National People’s Union (Latvijas Nacionālā tautas apvienība, LNTA). There have been also contacts to other parts of Latvia. Some former agents of the Wild Cat partisan centre had been very successful as initiators of partisan groups like the brothers Rusovs in Zemgale and Pēteris Supe in Latgale and Vidzeme.22 But one can hardly say that the Jagdverband was the only factor that was responsible for the anti-Soviet resistance in postwar Latvia. You just have to take a look at the neighbouring countries Estonia and Lithuania, where similiar movements emerged without any larger German help.
At the conclusion of this paper it must be stressed that the activities of the Wild Cat can be seen as “collaboration”, but also as a political articulation by Latvians, especially the people of the Latvian card index, preparing an anti-Soviet resistance with the main objective of an independent and western-type Latvian state. Collaboration with the Germans was at that moment the only possibility to get support for the preparation of an anti-Soviet resistance.
It becomes also obvious that historians have to do very intensive research on phenomena like collaboration. It is simply not enough just to enlist deeds of collaborators. It is necessary to investigate their past and kind of motivation and to consider individual and historical continuity. Finally, we will find complexity and contradiction inside collaboration. This case study shows that we historians have to be carefully with judgment. We cannot paint black and white pictures like Soviet historians as Vilis Samsons23 and Jānis Dzintars24 did, but we should also be very careful with developing new historical myths.

References

1 See Himmler’s Order to establish the SS Jagdverbände: Bundesarchiv Berlin (BA B), NS-33/275, 9ff.

2 See several internal documents of the SS Jagdverband Ost: Latvijas Valsts vēstures arhīvs (herein-after LVVA), P-82/1/48, 1ff.

Björn Michael Felder. SS Jagdverband Ost (1944–1945): A Case Study226 Latvija Otrā pasaules kara gados: kolaborācija, pretošanās, sabiedriskā doma un ārējie faktori

3 About the structure of the SS Jagdverbände, see: Mehnert, K. 1995. Die Waffen-SS und Polizei 1939–1945. Führung und Truppe. Norderstedt, 274 pp.

4 See internal documents of the SS Jagdverband Ost: LVVA, P-82/1/47, 263.

5 See interrogation of Bruno Tone, former SS Jagdverband member, by SMERŠ officer Geršgorin: Vladimirov, V. P. 1997. “Obrublennye ščupal’ca legionov Skorceni”, Vojenno-istoričeskij žurnal 2: 2–9.

6 About the German guerilla plans, see: Höhne, H. 1985. Der Krieg im Dunkeln. Macht und Einfluss des deutschen und russischen Geheimdienstes. München, 452ff.

7 About “Operation Zeppelin”, see: Mallmann, K.-M. 2003. “Der Krieg im Dunkeln. Das Unternehmen “Zeppelin” 1942–1945”, in: Wildt, M. (ed.) Nachrichtendienst, politische Elite, Mordeinheit. Der Sicherheitsdienst des Reichsführers SS. Hamburg, pp. 324–346.

8 See: circular letter, 12.11.44: BA B, RH-19III/16, 1ff.

9 Kommandeur des Sicherheitsdienstes und Sicherheitspolizei Ostland (KdS).

10 See SMERŠ interrogation report with Ansis Krūklis, 16.6.45: Latvijas Valsts arhīvs (hereinafter LVA), 1986/1/28579/137.

11 Biezais, H. 1991. Kurelieši, Nacionālās pretestības liecinieki. Ithaka, p. 125.

12 See the NKVD interrogation file about the group of Pēteris Dambītis: LVA, 1986/1/15930, 1ff.

13 About “Jagdkommandos”, see: LVVA, P-82/1/46/91–104.

14 About the local groups, see several internal documents and reports: LVA, 1986/1/47, 1ff.

15 See diary of Kurelis adjutant Jānis Gregors published in: Andersons, E., Siliņš, L. et al. (ed.) 2002. Latvija un Rietumi. Latviešu Nacionālā pretestības kustība 1943–1945. Rīga, 340ff.

16 See Jeckeln’s report on Kurelis group liquidation: BA B, R-90/4, 8.

17 See MGB interrogation with Kurelis officer Indulis Dišlers, 5.12.45: LVA, 1986/1/781/165.

18 About Jankavs biography, see his MGB-interrogation file: LVA, 1986/1/1126/1/1ff.

19 Ezergailis, A. (ed.) 1996. The Holocaust in Latvia. The Missing Center. Rīga; Washington, p. 168.

20 Moreover: Felder, B. 2004. ““Die Spreu vom Weizen trennen” Die Lettische Kartei – Pērkonkrusts im SD Lettland 1941–1943”, Yearbook of the Museum of the Occupation of Latvia 1940–1991, 2003. Rīga.

21 About Feldbergs-Jagdkommando, see: Dzintars, J. 1984. “Ar lāstiem apkrautie”, Cīņa, 30. jūnijs.

22 Kārlis Rusovs was agent of the “Mežakaķis” project: MGB interrogation with Jankavs 15.3.47: LVA, 1986/1/1126/1/75.

23 Samsons, V. 1984. Kurzemes meži šalc. Partizāņu un izlūku cīņa kara pēdējā gadā 1944–1945. Rīga.

24 Dzintars, J. 1982. “Latviešu fašistiskā buržuāzija hitleriešu izlūkdienesta kalpībā”, Latvijas PSR Zinātņu Akadēmijas Vēstis 10 (423): 52–69.

 

SS-Hstuf. Boriss Jankavs
(Unternehmen Wildkatze)
(c) Nezināmais karš. Latviešu nacionālo partizānu cīņas pret padomju okkupantiem otrais papildinātais izdevums 2012 (перевод Неизвестная война. Борьба латышских национальных партизан против советских оккупантов. второе дополненное издание)

 

насколько мне известно Это фото альбом... был бы материал скинулбы...