“Leadership on board German submarines in the last war has to be understood against a background of a special political environment. Young officers, such as these, were influenced by the political atmosphere prevalent in the school and in the youth movement. They swiftly denounced their commanding officer to higher authorities, accusing him of undermining the crew’s fighting spirit. He was arrested, and whilst being held prisoner awaiting trial for several months, not one of his senior officers contacted him. He was condemned to death and executed.

EDITOR NOTE – It is easy to understand why none of his senior officers came to visit him. It was already known that he would receive a ‘kangaroo court’ and would be found guilty and executed. Any senior officer who would have communicated with him or supported him in any way would be putting his own career, if not his very life, in jeopardy. That doesn’t make it right – but it is the way the military operates, even today.

This was certainly an exceptional case. However, it shows the influence of the totalitarian regime on military leaders who did not know at the time that their political masters were already engaged in criminal actions. Here, and in some cases, the ‘band of brothers’ was overshadowed by political parameters.

The unconditional power of the National Socialist Party granted a privileged position to the soldier or sailor, as long as he was a reliable follower of the party’s principles. Through its propaganda, submariners in particular, had a special role in public opinion. This stemmed from the very top. Hitler’s charismatic power over the masses is well known. So to is his nearly mesmerizing effect on Dönitz, whom he eventually designated as his successor as Führer. Dönitz in turn championed the U-Boat arm. His demands on the U-boat personnel were high, but his support for them. Both personally and politically, was unswerving and, calling themselves ‘Freikorps Dönitz’, they responded to him with a depth of respect, even devotion, which has few parallels in naval history. There was always the closest of contact between him & his officers and men. For example, on return from a patrol, commanding officers had to report to him personally in his headquarters. His staff organized special trains to transport crews to their rest area at a prepared health resort, and when he addressed submarine crews, he remembered not only the names of most of the crew members but even any family problems they might have.

With good reason, the U-boat personnel were viewed as members of an elite. In national military terms, they were seen to achieve great things in the war at sea – at a more mundane level, they never lacked for specially prepared food for long patrols, nor for coffee, tea or chocolate. Surface crews received such things only in small rations while the civilian population of course, never received any of these items at all.

The other end of the spectrum of propaganda was covered by pressure and threats, even capital punishment.

Each submariner obviously enjoyed and profited from the elite image of the U-boat arm. The image also brought a deep sense of obligation. One was profoundly conscious of the privilege of being a member of ‘Freikorps Dönitz’. This created a morale that was strong enough to camouflage or mask the overriding drive of every human being – to survive. That explains why, even in March-April 1945, submariners still went on patrol. On 1 May 1945, on board U-2513 and in company with four other boats, I personally sortied from Kiel Harbor. Three of them were bombed by British aircraft and sunk – only two arrived in Oslo.

Analyzing the question of U-boat leadership during World War II, you must also take an historic lesson into consideration. In 1917-18 Germany’s red revolution began in the Imperial Navy. One reason for this mutiny was the lack of leadership in the officer corps. Afterwards, the navy of the Weimar Republic and of the Third Reich was stigmatized by these events. This made the Kriegsmarine of World War II determined to be the most loyal of the loyal, and it is one of the reasons why (with certain notable exceptions, such as Admiral Canaris) naval officers did not participate in the resistance movement. If this was a negative outcome during World War II, on the positive side it resulted in the greatest possible personal & social commitment & inter-relationship of all officers not only in the lower but in the higher ranks as well. The general care and individual treatment of submariners created a confidence between the higher and lower ranks that resisted many personal problems. Material and non-material care, acknowledgement and appreciation of personal affairs were important instruments of leadership.

This personal contact between the commanding officer and his crew was the basis of a reliance that culminated in regarding their captain as a kind of life insurance.

To give an example of psychological care, again from my own experience – sailors are superstitious. Under my command, U-552 was leaving the Norwegian harbor of Bergen. We had already passed the Marsteen lighthouse and were in the open sea, traveling on the surface. My navigator, a petty officer, was on watch. For some reason, perhaps because I had come to know him well over many patrols, it seemed to me that he was not his usual self. He was pale and seemed unable to concentrate. I tried to find out his problem, but he was laconic, taciturn. I questioned him and finally he told me that he had forgotten his talisman, a myrtle wreath that people in my country used to store under a dome of the glass in memory of their marriage.

I could have told him not to be stupid. Instead, I reversed course. After some hours, we re-entered harbor and his myrtle wreath, the symbol of his marriage, was located. We went to sea again with my navigator – a very important man on board – restored to his normal calm. He contributed to a successful patrol.

Another example of individual treatment – obviously most of the punishments prescribed in the disciplinary code cannot be applied to a submarine in wartime. Cells are not available on board and on shore, having come home after sharing the same dangers and successes, sending an offender to jail or stopping his pay made no sense. On one occasion, one of my midshipmen was on the bridge, on watch, looking through his binoculars. For a surfaced submarine and its crew in wartime, to have an effective lookout is neither more nor less than a question of survival but apparently because of the last few days and nights in harbor, this young man was tired. I saw him closing his eyes behind the lens of his binoculars, and told him that if he was tired, we could switch the watch with another man.

‘No Captain,’ he said. ‘I am not tired. Let me continue the watch.’

I agreed. Half an hour later, I returned to the bridge and found him with his eyes closed again. This time he was exchanged. When he was brought before me for sentence on Commanding Officer’s report, I told him he was tired and must rest. The punishment I gave him was three days of doing nothing on board, not even assisting the cook. This may sound indulgent, but it was not. What it meant to him is evident. To have no part in an always active crew – to be nothing when others were always on the alert, carried the necessary message.

This and other lessons learned on board my boat, remained with him all his life. I know because after the war, when he was a well-known doctor of medicine, he paid me a visit and told me so.

To summarize: for U-boat personnel during World War II, individual combat readiness could not be secured entirely by selecting able personnel or even through effective training. In common with values, norms, political parameters and social factors, the quality of leadership received the fundamental credit of being successful throughout the war. As such, it contributed to continuing the war, even when it was already lost.

I would like to give you a personal, realistic understanding of leadership in relationship to recruitment and training. For me it’s like looking through a kaleidoscope with colored chips of glass inside. Their positions change but, although centuries may pass, their meanings never change. The chips of glass symbolize four things.

First is the devotion to one’s country. An old German proverb expresses this well. It states: ‘He who follows the Prussian flag has nothing of his own’.

Second is discipline. For that I can no better than to cite Admiral Nelson’s famous words: ‘England expects every man to do his duty’.

Third is comradeship. To take an English example again, John Jervis called the officers of his fleet ‘A band of brothers’.

Fourth and by no means least, is high morale. I have already mentioned Winston Churchill, who said of the U-boat personnel, ‘Their morale was unimpaired to the bitter end.’

When you turn the kaleidoscope, the chips move and the picture changes. A political regime can exploit the virtues of a soldier or sailor for its own political aims, even criminal ones. Thus, under Nazi rule, with a turn of the kaleidoscope and a movement of the chips, Germany exploited the virtues of its soldiers and sailors.

Primacy of policy is and always has been a rule not only in dictatorships but in all democracies. But this principle can be perverted and so, in conclusion, I adhere to the poet Franz Werfel, who said: ‘The primacy of policy annihilates the spirit, turning a master into a slave.’

A civilized world can have one primacy and one alone – the primacy of conscience.”

Vielen Dank ERICH for this deep and insightful piece of writing.

For those who are not aware, ERICH TOPP (118-LIFE-1985) was the third most successful submarine Skipper of any navy in World War II; veteran of 18 war patrols; decorated with the Knights Cross with Oak Leaf and Crossed Swords; the U-Boat badge in gold with diamonds and many other decorations. After the war he became an architect and designed, among other things, the Opera House in München. When the German Navy was rebuilt in the middle 1950’s, TOPP was one of the founding officers who formed the core of this new navy and he ultimately rose to the rank of Konter (Rear) Admiral with two stars.