Step by step, Montgomery

preamble

World War II was the largest global catastrophe in history, involving over 60 countries and regions and more than two billion people. In this war, all countries and people who loved peace united under the banner of opposing fascist aggression and defending national independence. They fought a long and bloody battle against the German, Italian, and Japanese fascist forces and finally won the victory in the anti-fascist war. Many famous generals emerged from various countries during the war, distinguished for their combat effectiveness, strategic wisdom, and bravery. Bernard Law Montgomery, a renowned British military leader and politician, was one of these prominent figures.

Montgomery's life was filled with legendary tales. Born on November 17, 1887, in Kennington, London, into a clergyman's family, he moved to Tasmania, Australia, with his father, Bishop Henry Montgomery, before he was two. In 1902, upon returning to Britain, he was enrolled at St. Paul's School and then entered the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst in January 1907. By September 1908, he was commissioned into the Royal Warwickshire Regiment and stationed in India. During World War I, initially as a lieutenant platoon leader, he saw action and was wounded. After recovering, he served as a staff officer and returned to the front, facing numerous dangers but always surviving.

At the start of World War II, he commanded the 3rd Division in France and Belgium against the German forces. After the Dunkirk evacuation, he held various commands in Britain, including the 5th and 12th Armies and the Southeastern Army Area. In 1942, as the British forces faced setbacks in the Far East and the Middle East, Montgomery took command of the British 8th Army in North Africa. He halted the Axis advance and secured a decisive victory at the Battle of El Alamein, changing the course of the North African campaign. Following North Africa, he participated in campaigns in Sicily and Italy and, in 1944, took command of the 21st Army Group to plan and lead the Normandy invasion. After the successful landings, he led his forces across Northern France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and into Northern Germany. On September 1, 1944, he was promoted to Field Marshal. On May 4, 1945, he accepted the surrender of German forces in Northern Germany, later serving as the Commander of the British occupation forces in Germany. From 1946 to 1948, he was the Chief of the Imperial General Staff and later held significant NATO positions until his retirement in 1958.

After retiring, Montgomery continued to engage in international and domestic politics for a decade. He visited numerous countries, shared his views on international relations, authored historical works and scripts for television and radio, and participated in domestic politics. He met with many renowned political figures, including Stalin, Khrushchev, Tito, Mao Zedong, Zhou Enlai, and Nehru, and authored several books.

Notably, Field Marshal Montgomery visited China twice in 1960 and 1961, warmly received by Chinese revolutionary leaders such as Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai. He gained a deeper understanding of China, appreciating the elimination of feudal oppression and foreign invasion and publicly supporting the new China over the old. During his 1961 visit, he proposed three principles for easing international tensions: acknowledging one China, recognizing two Germanys, and withdrawing all foreign troops to their own countries. These principles were well received and supported by the Chinese government and people.

Montgomery distinguished himself among his contemporaries primarily due to his unparalleled dedication to his profession. From the day he chose the "Army" class at St. Paul's School, he devoted himself to the military as his lifelong career. Whether studying at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, serving in India, training, or attending staff colleges in Camberley and Quetta, in times of peace or war, whether as a platoon leader or as the Chief of the Imperial General Staff, his focus was solely on training, combat, and victory. He did not smoke, drink, socialize, or pursue women, dedicating himself entirely to the military without any other interests or hobbies.

Montgomery's greatest talent was his ability to see the bigger picture and oversee the entire situation. He had a broad vision, quick reactions, and excelled at linking strategic needs with tactical operations and the forces under his command. He formulated the overall operational plans, delegating detailed planning to his staff, allowing him to concentrate on significant, overarching issues. His comprehensive understanding of warfare enabled him to remain calm and undisturbed by minor or superficial matters, making accurate judgments in complex situations. Few in World War II could think as he did, where many could win battles but not campaigns.

Montgomery was adept at recognizing and delegating to talented individuals, boldly incorporating newcomers. He once noted that a third of his working time was spent on personnel considerations. During the interwar period, he dedicated much time to identifying, selecting, and appointing talented officers using various methods. Upon joining a new unit, he would often dismiss incompetent officers and promote capable ones, refreshing and invigorating his troops despite some resentment. During World War II, he placed even greater emphasis on selecting excellent officers for leadership roles, ensuring a competent staff and carefully choosing subordinate commanders, promoting exceptionally performing individuals to lead regiments and divisions. His skill in personnel management ensured that his command structures were robust and highly motivated.

Montgomery was renowned for his training abilities. Whether teaching at staff colleges or commanding divisions and higher positions, he inspired interest in warfare among his troops. He instilled a fighting spirit and a sense of purpose, encouraging them to acquire necessary skills and motivating even those weary of war to fight and excel. His units were well-trained, high-spirited, and powerful.

Montgomery was meticulous in planning and accurate in his predictions. Unlike Rommel, who left significant room for contingencies, Montgomery would thoroughly assess every possibility and scenario, making careful and deliberate analyses to prepare for unforeseen events. His detailed plans inherently included accurate forecasts, as demonstrated when he forced Rommel to retreat on the 12th day of the Battle of El Alamein according to his plan.

One of Montgomery's fundamental wartime principles was "balance," emphasizing the avoidance of surprise, the necessity of reserves before attacking, and ensuring that supply issues did not hinder troop combat and mobility. This principle often forced the enemy off-balance while maintaining stability for his forces. Montgomery vigorously promoted this principle, insisting on thorough preparation in manpower and resources before any offensive, which attracted ridicule but provided his subordinates, from generals to company commanders, with a sense of security and confidence. Under his command, troops faced the front lines confidently with little concern for their rear, contributing to a cautious but reliable war approach that never saw him lose a major battle, thus maintaining his prestige among his forces.

Montgomery maintained close ties with his subordinates, commanding significant influence over his troops. He deeply scorned the detachment of senior command staff from frontline soldiers. Therefore, as a company, brigade, division, or corps commander, or even as Chief of the Imperial General Staff, he frequently visited units to inspect, observe, visit, watch exercises, preside over sports events, give speeches, and engage in discussions with officers and soldiers at all levels. This approach allowed every member of his command to recognize, understand, and draw strength and confidence from him. Regular interaction with his troops built a positive image in their minds, enhancing their trust and confidence in him. His forces, whether in North Africa or Europe, never experienced a gap in trust. Thus, whenever he inspected his troops before major battles, he greatly inspired and bolstered their confidence and fighting spirit, instilling in them a belief in certain victory.

One key reason for Montgomery's high esteem among his subordinates was his genuine care for them. He believed that indifference and callousness toward human factors would lead to failure. Hence, he always strived to make each soldier feel valued and cared for as an individual, ensuring they understood their roles and the reasons behind their tasks. He also paid attention to the well-being and recreational activities of his personnel, providing material and spiritual enjoyment after intense training, work, or combat.

However, like many great figures, Montgomery had his flaws and weaknesses.

Firstly, Montgomery's personal likes and dislikes profoundly affected his interpersonal relationships. While he could maintain close, understanding relationships with a few favored individuals and establish good rapport with the broader ranks of soldiers and the public, he could be extremely harsh toward those he disliked. For example, his treatment of Auchinleck in August 1942 was excessively brusque, a point even his admirers in military competence could not excuse. His personality occasionally caused friction and adverse outcomes when working alongside Americans.

Secondly, Montgomery's autocratic style sometimes led to significant misunderstandings. He believed that anyone in a high position should quickly and clearly identify problems and solutions as he did. While he was adept at communicating his intentions and goals to his subordinates, he often failed to keep his peers and superiors informed. This lack of communication led to misunderstandings, especially when expected outcomes did not materialize, causing anxiety among his superiors. For example, his reorganization of troops before the Battle of El Alamein caused widespread concern; news of divisions retreating from the frontline sparked panic in London, although Montgomery remained unfazed. Clearer communication could have prevented such misunderstandings and alleviated the anxiety and confusion that followed the Battle of Goodwood.

Lastly, Montgomery was not adept at mobile warfare. While he was a master of well-planned defensive battles, he lacked the flair for rapid, maneuver-based operations. Compared to Rommel's bold strikes, Patton's forceful advances, or the large-scale armored maneuvers of German and Soviet forces on the Eastern Front, Montgomery seemed less effective. His use of tanks in the battles of El Alamein and Goodwood, although defensible, was certainly problematic. After these victories, he failed to command swift, forward maneuvers to exploit the successes fully, missing opportunities for greater triumphs. Hence, mobile warfare was not Montgomery's forte.

Finally, Montgomery's deep-rooted vanity made it difficult for him to exercise self-restraint. As a youth, Montgomery was suppressed by his mother at home and ostracized by wealthier peers at school, inevitably developing a sense of inferiority. Once he gained power and achieved a certain status, this inferiority complex transformed into vanity and conceit. Undoubtedly, his vanity and overconfidence subtly, and sometimes directly, impacted his decision-making in military strategies. The Operation Market Garden plan, his intense debate with Eisenhower over "single thrust" strategy and the appointment of a "single ground force commander," and his behavior during the German surrender at Lüneburg Heath were all influenced by his vanity and conceit, leading to unfavorable outcomes.

To honor Montgomery's significant contributions to the anti-fascist war and world peace, and to provide readers with a comprehensive and objective understanding of his life, the author has compiled "Step by Step: Montgomery" based on various materials accumulated from studying foreign militaries. In writing this book, the author endeavored to apply historical materialism, aiming to describe and evaluate Montgomery and various historical events historically, objectively, comprehensively, and fairly. However, due to the author's limited political acumen and historical knowledge, shallow research on certain historical issues, the inability to conduct further field investigations on many historical events, and time constraints, the book inevitably contains inaccuracies or errors. Readers are welcome to offer criticisms and corrections.