The "break out" at Minqar Qaim-Egypt, in June 1942

Silviu · Post by **Silviu** » 21 Nov 2003 15:57

From a passage in Dal McQuirks's book, "Rommel's Army in Africa"
published in 1987, McQuirk described how 2nd NZ division "steam-rollered" through a German field hospital killing everyone in it. The 104
Regimental Field Hospital lay behind the first line of German vehicles
and trenches in an area held by 111 Bn of the 104th Motorised Infantry
Regiment of the 21st Panzer Division. According to McQuirk: "What
followed was an incident that was to incense Rommel and gave rise to
charges in the German Press that the New Zealanders were gangsters
fightingan uncivilised war."
According to both sides it was chaos. Some of the
Afrika Korps described the New Zealand division as behaving like
"Bolsheviks drunk on vodka" and according to Brigadier JT Burrows (4
Brigade), "complained bitterly about the way the New Zealanders carried
out thier bayonet attack that night". Brigadier George Clifton was
closely questioned by Field Marshall Edwin Rommel about the break out
after Clifton was captured.

Any more details about this or other similar incidents?

Silviu

Christoph Awender · Post by **Christoph Awender** » 21 Nov 2003 16:39

Hello!

Well a exact date would definately help but this is what I found and I think this is the incident.

In the night 27./28.Juni 1942 the 21.Pz.Div. takes positions to the west to prevent enemy units to break out. A Spähtrupp reports the enemy positions just 800m away. It was the 2.NZ-division at the hillsides of the Djebel of Minqar Qaim (Bir Abu Batta)
The 4./Schtz.Rgt.104 under Olt.Pfeiffer holds the line during the night.
Suddenly the far left platoon fires a Pak and suddenly crowds of enemy soldiers assault the german positions with bayonets. From the left enemy M.G. and Pak fire starts and causes heavy casualties.
Soon the german defenders and the attackes are mixed up in close combat and no side can bring M.G.s into action. The enemy sets several vehicles on fire including ambulance cars with wounded soldiers which were not brought back during the day.
Olt.Pfeiffer is injured by three bullets and grenade fragments. The enemy infantry is followed by trucks maned with soldiers firing and throwing handgrenades.
After 15 minutes the attack is over. The enemy disappears into the night via the northern side of the Wadi.
The I./104 loses in this engagement 100 KIA and about the same number WIA.

Well this is what I found. No Feldlazarett 104 existed so I guess the authors you mention mean the regimental Hauptverbandplatz or another medical installation of the regiment or company.

\Christoph

John W · Post by **John W** » 21 Nov 2003 18:40

Rommel did indeed complain to Clifton by the "gangster" methods used by his NZ. I think he was troubled by the fact that many Germans in that attack had been stabbed repeatedly by succeeding waves of NZers. I think Clifton explained that 'in the heat and confusion of the battle, some of the NZ noticed that wounded Germans would lie still and shoot after the wave had passed them. Thus suceeding waves of NZ didn't bother to check and bayoneted men as they passed'.

Or something similar. I will come home from Lab and give an exact quotation.

Christoph Awender · Post by **Christoph Awender** » 21 Nov 2003 20:49

John W wrote:Rommel did indeed complain to Clifton by the "gangster" methods used by his NZ. I think he was troubled by the fact that many Germans in that attack had been stabbed repeatedly by succeeding waves of NZers. I think Clifton explained that 'in the heat and confusion of the battle, some of the NZ noticed that wounded Germans would lie still and shoot after the wave had passed them. Thus suceeding waves of NZ didn't bother to check and bayoneted men as they passed'.

Or something similar. I will come home from Lab and give an exact quotation.

Well, according to the KTB of this Btl. there were no succeeding waves as he says the whole thing was over within 15 minutes. See the report above.

\Christoph

Silviu · Post by **Silviu** » 21 Nov 2003 21:59

Thank you, Cristoph and John for your comments.

Silviu

alf · Post by **alf** » 22 Nov 2003 00:07

Tucked away below is a link to the online New Zealand Offical History of World War 2, it has a detailed description and map and a sublink has some paintings of the breakout.

I have some questions about Dal McQuirks's version in his book, "Rommel's Army in Africa". The passage quoted seems to popularism with a bias on Rommel not history. The Kiwis were breaking out heading East to reach the 8th Army again, so a Field Hospital was placed between them and the 8th Army??

Rommel describing the Kiwis has barbarians? That hinged very much on if he was winning or losing, he also described the New Zealand Division as possibly the finest troops in the British Empire. His attitude was illuminating, when he won he was magnamious in his description of enemy troops : - the better the enemy, the more important his victory. When he was losing he was not so generous.

This battle shows how badly the Afrika Korp performed in hand to hand fighting, they were unprepared and caught unawares and it seems they paniced. Better to blame the enemy for brutality than look at the performance of one's own troops.

I do have to ask, how is one to be civilised in a bayonet fight???????
I regret to say in the few instances I was involved in one, I acted very uncivilised.

But to the link itself.

http://www.nzetc.org/etexts/WH2Egyp/c12.html

Fourth Brigade did not falter. To quote from Lieutenant-Colonel Burrows' report, ‘a most amazing and thrilling thing happened. To a man the whole brigade charged forward. No orders were given; no urging forward by officers and non-commissioned officers. With shouting, cheering and war cries every man broke into a run as if he knew exactly what was expected of him.'

The shouting and cheering were more of a frenzied yell. The pent-up emotions of the last minutes on the assembly line and of the steady march were freed. The yell was heard above the din of the fire. It carried 4 Brigade as on a wave into the defences. With a few yards to go, some men checked as if to return the enemy's fire and beat it down. What was their purpose, no one knows precisely, for check and sweeping on to close with bayonet, bomb and bullet were almost simultaneous.

On the right flank, the Maoris swung a little further out and drew level with 19 Battalion. From column, the companies changed into line and made short work of some machine-gun posts. On the main objective, the neck between Bir and Mahatt Abu Batta, little opposition was found by 19 Battalion. In a splendid exhibition of the characteristics of spirited troops, 19 Battalion immediately turned down into the Bir Abu Batta re-entrant to give 20 Battalion a hand. There, among the parked German transport, the greatest resistance was met.

Using bayonets, rifles, tommy guns, Brens fired from the hip and the newly-issued bakelite grenade, the two battalions penetrated into the centre of the close-parked laager. Here, for a few minutes, there was the ‘impassioned drama’ of war. No chances could be taken. Kill or be killed. The bayonet was used with terrifying effect. The German slumped in the corner of a trench or lying on the ground might be shamming. He might fire a shot or throw a grenade when backs were turned. A thrust or a bullet eliminated the risk.

In the slit trenches, most of the Germans had their boots off. Some were undressed. While some Germans attempted to surrender and some to make off by foot and in trucks, others fought hard. Machine-gunners who used the light of burning trucks or of deliberately lit petrol fires to help their aim were dealt with by the simple process of assault from all points except on the line of fire. Truck drivers used wheeled and half-tracked vehicles as tanks in efforts to overrun the attackers. Some got away, but most fell victim to bullets and bombs, including the sticky grenade.

The flashes of explosions, the blaze of burning vehicles, the smoke, dust and the yells and screams made an inferno through which 19 and 20 Battalions fought their way to the far side of the laager. They had punched the required hole. On the eastern side of the wadi, the companies and battalions reformed while the transport came up in response to the success signal.

..............

The outstanding feature of Minqar Qaim was not its impact on the enemy or its contribution to Eighth Army's operations, but that the Division escaped annihilation. The Division's concentration on the escarpment made it vulnerable to air attack. Dive-bombers could have done much towards destroying the transport and silencing the guns. Very little, if any, protection was available from the Royal Air Force as its ground organisation was also moving back. Had the Division, its gun ammunition almost exhausted, been pinned to the ground by the destruction of its transport, it is difficult to see how it could have escaped the enemy armoured divisions assembling for the kill at first light on 28 June]

Christoph Awender · Post by **Christoph Awender** » 22 Nov 2003 00:47

This battle shows how badly the Afrika Korp performed in hand to hand fighting, they were unprepared and caught unawares and it seems they paniced. Better to blame the enemy for brutality than look at the performance of one's own troops.

So your conclusion from this incident is that the entire Afrika Korps was bad in close combat?
Every unit in every army of the world could have been catched by surprise by an unexpected overwhelming attack when 80% of the men are sleeping because of many days in combat.

\Christoph

alf · Post by **alf** » 22 Nov 2003 00:59

So your conclusion from this incident is that the entire Afrika Korps was bad in close combat? Every unit in every army of the world could have been catched by surprise by an unexpected overwhelming attack when 80% of the men are sleeping because of many days in combat

Sorry, I did not mean the entire Afrika Korp, rather the Units involved in the action itself. I thought I said

they were unprepared and caught unawares and it seems they paniced

. Which is exactly what You have said isnt it?

Every unit in every army of the world could have been catched by surprise

But in this instance the Kiwis were also tired after many days of fighting, and would have been equally tired.

The waves spoken on would proably have been the 19th Battalion moving its axis to assist the 20th battalion, there could have been an overlap so it would appear a second wave.

John W · Post by **John W** » 22 Nov 2003 01:50

I think my original posting has caused much confusion

. Here is what I meant:

Speaking in german, although evidently he understood English, he proceeded to harangue me about the 'gangster' methods of the New Zealanders. It appeared that we had bayoneted the German wounded at Minqarqaim in the night battle behind Matruh and he was very much annoyed by it. He said that if we wanted to fight rough, so could they, and that any further action of this sort on our part would be answered by immediate reprisals.

As the nearest New Zealander available for such reprisals, it became a rather personal matter to me. I was, however, able to explain our point of view over the occurances of that famous night attack. Our first wave, going through in the dark, caught the Germans by surprise. Some of them, lying on the ground, had fired and thrown bombs after the first company had passed. As a result, the supports following on simply stuck every man who failed to stand up and surrender. It is quite likely that some of the Germans were bayoneted several times by people in passing.

These are the words of the famous Brigadier Clifton. I have taken this quote from Rommel : The Desert Fox by Desmond Young (page 134)

John W · Post by **John W** » 22 Nov 2003 01:51

I also forgot to mention that Rommel himself mentions this attack in similar vein in his own writings (Rommel Papers)

sand digger · Post by **sand digger** » 25 Nov 2003 04:52

You would have to wonder about the sense in placing a field hospital so close to the front line and apparently in very close proximity to that which could make an attractive target. The dumbo who made that decision should have copped the blame. But Rommel was a whinger.

The rest of it is not particularly unusual, there are plenty of accounts of Germans in NA who pretended to surrender or played dead and then attacked.

Christoph Awender · Post by **Christoph Awender** » 25 Nov 2003 06:46

sand digger wrote:You would have to wonder about the sense in placing a field hospital so close to the front line and apparently in very close proximity to that which could make an attractive target. The dumbo who made that decision should have copped the blame. But Rommel was a whinger.

The rest of it is not particularly unusual, there are plenty of accounts of Germans in NA who pretended to surrender or played dead and then attacked.

Sand digger, pleasse read the account of the 4./104 again! There was NO field hospital right at the frontline. There were some ambulances with wounded soldiers which did not leave before darkness. Driving through the desert in the dark is dangerous so they stayed there. So they stayed there.

\Christoph

John W · Post by **John W** » 25 Nov 2003 06:47

sand digger wrote:The dumbo who made that decision should have copped the blame. But Rommel was a whinger.

Perhaps I should have posted the remaining part of the quote as well. Rommel doesn't really blame the New Zealanders (or for that matter any ANZAC) and regarded them as excelent opponents. He often remarked that given sufficient quantities of ANZAC troops, he could have won the damned war. I think that speaks highly about the respect the man had for his opponents.

Hardly a 'whinger' methinks.

Christoph Awender · Post by **Christoph Awender** » 25 Nov 2003 09:39

BTW Sand digger... I would be very interested in the plenty of accounts about german soldiers "playing dead" and then attacking!
Please give source of information!

regards,
Christoph

sand digger · Post by **sand digger** » 26 Nov 2003 03:55

Christoph Awender wrote:BTW Sand digger... I would be very interested in the plenty of accounts about german soldiers "playing dead" and then attacking!
Please give source of information!

regards,
Christoph

As experienced by 9 AIF around El Alamein 1942 and recorded in the official history series, Tobruk and El Alamein volume. No big deal though, the sort of things mentioned in this topic sometimes happened in the heat of battle irrespective of who was involved. And NA was cleaner than most on all sides.