I do believe the Serbian claims have merit; Draza Mihailovich The Battle of Moscow was a close run thing with both sides in desperate straights. The diversion of NAZI strength to fight guerrillas in Yugoslavia-nine crack divisions was it?-was certainly an important factor in the overall outcome. Jeff in MN USA
Was the Balkans war already such a drain in Winter '41? I thought it had become more intense later. How many troops did the the Axis have deployed in Yugoslavia at the time? The article sounds a bit like hagiography...
The cost of occuppying Yugoslavia came to cost Hitler 38 divisions; Yugoslavia (former) World War II - Flags, Maps, Economy, History, Climate, Natural Resources, Current Issues, International Agreements, Population, Social Statistics, Political System Granted these were often second line or Axis allied formations. Tito's Partisans were accounted the most effective, and the Brits switched support from Mahailovic's Chetniks to the Partisans-some say at the behest of Red spies operating in British intelligence. Mihailovic backed away from the business of killing NAZIs in the face of horrific German reprisals on the civilian population. JeffinMNUSA
Well, I believe the final chapter belongs to the dictator himself, Adolf Hitler, for changing the main objective all along the autumn. Anyway, of course these things matter to the final result, but how come the Yugoslav army 1 million in strength fought back for ...what is it...a week or two only? They could have held the German troops forever in battle as I know having been there that the roads are narrow and it is easy to attack troops from the bigger and smaller mountains surrounding the roads and villages....Who sabotaged thre Yugoslav army fighting ability or was it again the "idiot" generals making bad mistakes...
IIRC in Yugoslavia alone they tied down around 28 German and Italian divisions. Not all were "Crack" divisions. http://www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/antiguer-ops/AG-BALKAN.HTM
Za; No direct influence on Moscow that I know of-there was the diversion of NAZi strength. The Yugos also showed the world that armed resistance to Axis occupation was possible. I do believe there was some liason groups with Italian Partisans-but this time frame was in 1944. What role Moscow played in supporting other Red groups is still unknown-though I would imagine they sent out expertise and arms. JeffinMNUSA
Correct-no direct linkage. But every brush fire war cost the German War Machine and coming at the time it did it might have cost the NAZIs Moscow. An interesting BBC article on the subject; http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/partisan_fighters_02.shtml The Yugoslav resistance definitely delayed Barbarossa; http://www.srpska-mreza.com/History/ww2/book/Shirer.html
Of course the guerilla in the Balkans did for the Reich what the Spanish Ulcer did for Napoleon, it diverted a wholly disproportionate amount of troops, involved in a brutal war. I was just wondering about the direct link so early in the war. Interesting article, by the way.