Political comissars in Red Army

[Henry IX]

There are a few important things to remember about unofficial punishments in the Red Army:

Firstly, the Soviet Union was a much more accepting society of casual violence. Parents hit kids. Friends wold get drunk, get into fist fights and be friends the next day. Cuffing an inferior as a warning or punishment was normal. People expected and excepted getting physically hurt as a form of punishment.

Secondly, the official punishments for many actions were extremely severe. If the soldier who had been collecting German leaflets had been actually tried and convicted in an official court martial he may well have been sent to gulag, punishment battalion or even shot as he would have been charged with some form of anti-Soviet crime. Being hit with a belt was way, way better than an official trial. By hitting him with a belt the officer was effectively treating him as a naughty child rather than an adult knowingly undertaking anti-Soviet propaganda. By punishing him as a child the officer may have been making a statement about his culpability.

Finally, by punishing him quickly and personally the officer is actually building trust and cohesion in the unit. The soldier has been punished, therefore justice has occurred, but it was done in such a way that the soldier is back on the front lines very quickly without his record being tarnished by official accusations (in the Stalinist USSR to be even accused of counter-revolutionary action could be a serious problem). All of his fellow soldiers would have recognised this and respect for the officer would have been increased: he deals with things himself but he also looks out for his own.

The nature of the punishment may even have been a deliberate statement to the soldier - you are acting like a stupid child rather than a responsible adult, with the subtext of what might happen if he were to be treated as a responsible adult hanging over him.

 

[Victor1234]

Thank you for these deep insights into the violent culture of the Soviet Union, which of course was so different from others of the time.

Yesterday memoirs of one comissar were firstly published. Interesting info from it.

- What was your role as a commissioner?

- My task was to educate the fighters, to raise their morale by conducting political information, reading newspapers (Krasnaya Zvezda, Pravda, Izvestia). When one of the soldiers received a letter from home, I allowed him to read the letter out loud in front of everyone, so that everyone would know what was going on in the rear. I lacked a little experience in conducting political work, so I did not hesitate to turn to more experienced political workers in other units. They told me what and how best to do.

- How did your relationship with the commander develop?

- Fine. The battery commander was a smart guy. He wore an overcoat wide open, then put on a Kubanka with a red top instead of a budenovka. I told him that you shouldn't do that. He understood everything. With the commander, we understood each other well. He was more experienced, because he served in the units longer than me. He graduated from an anti-aircraft school somewhere in Evpatoria in the Crimea.

****

- Was your task to instill hatred of the Germans among our soldiers?

- Yes, that was the main task. He fostered in them hatred of the enemy as an occupier. He is the enemy! I loved to read, there were many articles from Orenburg. I read them to the soldiers, they loved to listen. I read how the Tambov collective farmers raised a sum of money and built a tank column on them. Then the Saratov beekeeper Golovaty bought a second plane at his own expense.

The battery was under the front line: maybe three or four hundred meters from the front line in disguised form. Forest. Dugout for people and horses. There was a kitchen. It was impossible to move during the day, because the German sniper would shoot immediately. As soon as it gets dark, you can. As a political worker, I received newspapers regularly, every day. These were: Pravda, Izvestia, Krasnaya Zvezda, as well as the divisional newspaper Za Rodinu. So, as soon as it gets dark, I went with these newspapers to the calculations, to the guns. There was a small dugout that was heated by a stove. You come. Everyone sits down, except for the night observer: he is still standing. The stove is on. I start reading newspapers, I tell them, they ask me questions, and I answer. That is, this is how I conducted political work directly. I read about how people collect money for the army, for weapons. We considered the example of the foreman of our battery Parakhin, a miner near Moscow.

Thank you for the thread, very interesting topic of course, but there are a few things that I didn't understand. What is the significance of his reading the newspaper to the soldiers? I understand the obvious political propaganda/communal aspects, but is it also a hint at illiteracy, that they actually couldn't read the newspaper themselves? What is the point of having so many different newspapers as well? Pravda and Izvestia are well known of course, and the divisional newspaper would probably have more relevant detail for these soldiers, but what does Krasnaya Zvezda write about that is not in Pravda or Izvestia?

There is also the part about the battery commander. I completely don't understand the significance of his wearing an overcoat wide open or why he shouldn't do that.

Finally, I am not well versed on the subject of beekeeping, or the economics of honey, but it seems a little strange that a beekeeper should be able to afford to buy two airplanes (!) for the war effort at his own expense. Was honey the liquid gold of the Soviet Union or is he outside of the collective agriculture and allowed to keep all of his profits?

 

[Kupr]

Thank you for the thread, very interesting topic of course, but there are a few things that I didn't understand. What is the significance of his reading the newspaper to the soldiers? I understand the obvious political propaganda/communal aspects, but is it also a hint at illiteracy, that they actually couldn't read the newspaper themselves?

Reading the newspaper it is like internet and TV now (youtube, facebook, forums and so on).
Because of total mobilization for war population and soldiers lack in everything from pre-war civil life. So simle paper was rare.
Soviet letters during war for economy of paper:

Plus, soldiers and officers couldn't have personal notes with any personal information during war. Newspaper could be same way.
So comissar was like "access to information" with explanations in communist way with google/comissar around for different questions.

During my excursion in Berlin around 10 years ago local guide explained that Germans do not understand why Red army tried to take Reichstag as final point of war. It didn't work as parliament many years by 1945. I think comissars explained soldiers and officers of Red army about Reichstag burning provocation and blaming communist Dimitrov in it. So Reichstag was most known building in German capital for Red Army because of comissar agitation. So taking it means end of war for soldiers.

What is the point of having so many different newspapers as well? Pravda and Izvestia are well known of course, and the divisional newspaper would probably have more relevant detail for these soldiers, but what does Krasnaya Zvezda write about that is not in Pravda or Izvestia?

Krasnaya Zvezda is newspaper of whole Red army. So Pravda and Izvestia is newspapers from all USSR, including civil population. Krasnaya Zvezda information about all Army. I think it was all possible newspapers during war.

There is also the part about the battery commander. I completely don't understand the significance of his wearing an overcoat wide open or why he shouldn't do that.

It is about "Kubanka" national dress for cossacks, including Red cossacks. So it wasn't official millitary uniform, especcially at the beginning of war. During war cossacks born officers freely used it serving in different parts of army.
Plus, it was official uniform for cossacks cavalry divisions.

Finally, I am not well versed on the subject of beekeeping, or the economics of honey, but it seems a little strange that a beekeeper should be able to afford to buy two airplanes (!) for the war effort at his own expense. Was honey the liquid gold of the Soviet Union or is he outside of the collective agriculture and allowed to keep all of his profits?

I do not know. I think nobody counted it exactly. Just people donated savings for army during war. It was popular movement that people or organisation "financed" tank or aircraft columns to front and so on.
For example, tank column from working people of Mongolia:

It was not point to give more money it was point to join movement. So increasing of soviet M2 didn't increase inflation encouraging people to save and be economical.

 

[Kupr]

Some video about using "Kubanka".

4-00
6-12

 

[Kupr]

There are a few important things to remember about unofficial punishments in the Red Army:

Firstly, the Soviet Union was a much more accepting society of casual violence.

It was not only soviet one. It was else ancient Russian tradition. I mean "Fist fight" (Kulachniy boy) in Russian villages. Some historians wrote that it had roots from very ancient times as element of defense of Russian population.

Before communists:

Newspapers of Russian empire about such events:

Tradition lived in some places even after Stalin's dead.
1954. Village Kuplya in Ryazan region:

Recent time it transferred in football fights:

There is violence among history buffs too:

 

[fr-rein]

I think the biggest issue with memoirs is the fact that it is survivor's point of view. Or rather... bad commissars en masse didn't survive and were gone, either due to the defeats or dying other ways.

Hence why their duties were incorporated to the regular officers while the commissars were made regular officers. The mentioned before duality of command was awful too - because it limited decisions which officers could take as otherwise commissar would do other thing anyway. It messes with planning and strategy and if you had a bad commissar...

In the end, I think that main reason for them being disbanded was the ineffectiveness of ideology in motivating soldiers. At that point of time it became clear that no one would die for communism if they could avoid it.

Hence the soft switch in narration to the more patriotic/nationalist agitation, the "Homeland War" cult, thaw between USSR and Orthodox church, "liberation" of occupied countries (instead of spreading communism), etc. Soft removal of ideology happened. Soviet state no longer saw Communist ideology in classic way as good enough to uphold morale and keep people agitated. It did keep lessons of marxism-leninism, but who ever believed in that or was convinced by those?

 

[Kupr]

I think the biggest issue with memoirs is the fact that it is survivor's point of view. Or rather... bad commissars en masse didn't survive and were gone, either due to the defeats or dying other ways.

I do not agree here. What do you mean pointing "Bad"?

Hence why their duties were incorporated to the regular officers while the commissars were made regular officers. The mentioned before duality of command was awful too - because it limited decisions which officers could take as otherwise commissar would do other thing anyway. It messes with planning and strategy and if you had a bad commissar

I do not agree here too. Commissar could point to officer on his mistakes from political point of view. Like example with officer dressing nonofficial hat "Kubanka" at the beginning of war. Plus, comissar was eyes of ruling party over army. Same time only officer was responsible for results of battle. Comissar could take command over unit in very serious situations only - So in such event comissar was directly responsible for results of battle whitout ability to return command to officer. Officer had control over him and I know numerous examples when it was very good for army and soldiers.

In the end, I think that main reason for them being disbanded was the ineffectiveness of ideology in motivating soldiers. At that point of time it became clear that no one would die for communism if they could avoid it.

Communist patriots who died for communism lefted on the battlefields of 1941-1942. Communists was able to educate only young generation as new communist people. This generation died mostly on battlefields. Old generation remembered WWI and "Bratanie" with simple Germans:

If to read memoirs, old generation freely went on german side at the begining of war remembering WWI and fathers/grandfathers stories about it. It stopped after RKKA (Working-People Red Army) started to liberate lands. Opinion changed. Plus, comissars propaganda in official newspapers like here:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dr-PemLX0AAa3cU.jpg

Hence the soft switch in narration to the more patriotic/nationalist agitation, the "Homeland War" cult, thaw between USSR and Orthodox church, "liberation" of occupied countries (instead of spreading communism), etc. Soft removal of ideology happened. Soviet state no longer saw Communist ideology in classic way as good enough to uphold morale and keep people agitated. It did keep lessons of marxism-leninism, but who ever believed in that or was convinced by those?

As I noted young generation from town's factories was educated by new soviet power and were strong supporters of communist ideology. Old generation, especcialy from peasants wasn't ones so they were agitated by homeland war later.

Призывников какого года рождения погибло больше всего в годы войны

В Советскую армию было призвано более 34 миллионов человек от 17 до 60 лет. Число людей каждого года рождения существенно уменьшилось за годы войны.

militaryexp.com

KIA during WWII from generations:

17-20 years - 18%
21-25 years - 22%
26-30 years - 17.5%
31-35 years - 16.5%
36-40 years - 12%
41-45 years - 8%
46-50 years - 5%
51 and older years - 1%

 

[Kupr]

Opinion changed. Plus, comissars propaganda in official newspapers like here:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dr-PemLX0AAa3cU.jpg

I think that only communist idelogy and comissars as ruling hand of it in Red army stopped Germans from mass destruction at the end of war. Communists explained that we are not fascists. We are people so we will not do like Germans did in USSR.
Honestly, If not communists ideology and comissars almost nobody stopped Red army to do desert from German lands whitout any german on it. That was spirits in all army:


"Here she is damn germany!":

{It is interesting - soldier has German belt}.


A warrior of the red army in front of you is the lair of a fascist beast:

From nespaper "The red army invaded the lair of the fascist beast":

I see here total dehumanization of German lands at the beginnig. They were considered as beasts. Not humans...

 

[fr-rein]

I do not agree here. What do you mean pointing "Bad"?

Poorly performing. In 1941 a lot of army troops collapses. One of factors was due to the fact that officers in there weren't able to perform well their task and react to the situation well. Some were outright punished/executed.

So many post-war memories rely on those who were adequate, survived and won, giving a distorted picture. Which is not to say that they were all bad... but rather memories which claim them all to be adequate and good are unreliable.

I do not agree here too. Commissar could point to officer on his mistakes from political point of view. Like example with officer dressing nonofficial hat "Kubanka" at the beginning of war. Plus, comissar was eyes of ruling party over army. Same time only officer was responsible for results of battle. Comissar could take command over unit in very serious situations only - So in such event comissar was directly responsible for results of battle whitout ability to return command to officer. Officer had control over him and I know numerous examples when it was very good for army and soldiers.

This works only with assumption that officer and commissar act right and nice which wasn't always the case.
It's not even taking a command over unit that is bad, it is a fear of being sacked for a bad decision later. Especially retreating or such.
It's also invasive to the command structure of army overall, not only in field level, where it plays a bigger role.

As I noted young generation from town's factories was educated by new soviet power and were strong supporters of communist ideology. Old generation, especcialy from peasants wasn't ones so they were agitated by homeland war later.

Good point here.

Communist patriots who died for communism lefted on the battlefields of 1941-1942. Communists was able to educate only young generation as new communist people. This generation died mostly on battlefields.

Despite the atrocious losses, that generation didn't go extinct and it was still the next generation after the war which formed the next "boomer" generation and was the one to pass their ideals.

I think that only communist idelogy and comissars as ruling hand of it in Red army stopped Germans from mass destruction at the end of war. Communists explained that we are not fascists. We are people so we will not do like Germans did in USSR.
Honestly, If not communists ideology and comissars almost nobody stopped Red army to do desert from German lands whitout any german on it. That was spirits in all army:

I don't think that after whipping army with propaganda calming it down (with propaganda) is a big deal.
Even more so, almost all sides in war did something similar and didn't have the regular army committing atrocious warcrimes left and right out of hate.

Even Germans in fact presented themselves as liberators of sorts and as a humane force against "communist plague" and Wehrmacht primarily fighting and not committing war crimes. And it was also for a pragmatic reason - you want your army actually focused on committing war duties, for the ugly things there were primarily other groups. Just like Soviets handled what they wanted with NKVD squads instead of Red Army. Otherwise, army could take a massive blow to discipline, morale and could accidentally burn own supply lines.

I don't think that given all things that fairly fall into warcrime category that USSR did (massive deportations of Germans and other nations, massive imprisonment of people suspected of political unloyalty (including veterans) and other things). And I don't include story of trophies because it is complicated topic which at least wasn't a direct pillaging (although for a while I thought so due to different reasons).

 

[Kupr]

Poorly performing. In 1941 a lot of army troops collapses. One of factors was due to the fact that officers in there weren't able to perform well their task and react to the situation well. Some were outright punished/executed.

My statement that comissar perfectly performed in own part of work in 1941-1942. Germany (9-11 mln. soldiers perfectly prepared, expirienced and mobilised in one fist) attacked unprapered reformed Red army (5,7 mln. soldiers in 3 separate strategic echelons). Actually German first fought against each russian echelon separatly (Red army/3 in each case). Loosing recources and people comissars mobilised soldiers to fight in bad conditions. Comissars and soldiers inspired by them were crushed under the tracks of a German military vehicle. But German military vehicle stalled because of it. Experienced german soldiers were changed by fresh replenishment. Same was with Red Army killed and maimed comissars and their soldiers were changed by fresh replenishment and war started to be war of attrition.

As wrote one russian historian (Alexey Isaev) German mob. corp was wunderwaffe in 1941-1942. Nobody couldn't stop it. Even comissars only stalled it.

So many post-war memories rely on those who were adequate, survived and won, giving a distorted picture. Which is not to say that they were all bad... but rather memories which claim them all to be adequate and good are unreliable.

As I noted here survived soldiers of 1941-1942 (small part of veterans of WWII) almost always wrote good about own comissars. Comissars after reforms of 1943 were other people.

This works only with assumption that officer and commissar act right and nice which wasn't always the case.
It's not even taking a command over unit that is bad, it is a fear of being sacked for a bad decision later. Especially retreating or such.
It's also invasive to the command structure of army overall, not only in field level, where it plays a bigger role.

Same time were very many other examples when after start of war soviet officers acted aggressive and actively.
Same behavior I noted here as result of bombing Finland in June 25, 1941:

About Stalin's intentions regarding Finland in WW2

I'm glad to see Spain get a tree, but I still await a Finnish one. I think it's a great crime against the theme of the game to not represent a country that, at least militarily, accomplished more in WW2 in mere months than the great powers of...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

About Stalin's intentions regarding Finland in WW2

I'm glad to see Spain get a tree, but I still await a Finnish one. I think it's a great crime against the theme of the game to not represent a country that, at least militarily, accomplished more in WW2 in mere months than the great powers of...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

I don't think that after whipping army with propaganda calming it down (with propaganda) is a big deal.
Even more so, almost all sides in war did something similar and didn't have the regular army committing atrocious warcrimes left and right out of hate.

Even Germans in fact presented themselves as liberators of sorts and as a humane force against "communist plague" and Wehrmacht primarily fighting and not committing war crimes. And it was also for a pragmatic reason - you want your army actually focused on committing war duties, for the ugly things there were primarily other groups.

I agree here pointing that comissars were effective ruling hand of communist party to control red army.

I don't think that given all things that fairly fall into warcrime category that USSR did (massive deportations of Germans...

My teacher of philosophy at the university was german Meyer. His familiy was deportated in Kazakhstan, they lived there like simple soviet citizens during evacuation. In 1944 he was mobilised and educated as pilot figher and fought in 1945 in Germany. In modern time he met May 9 like usual Soviet veteran. He didn't think that his deportation like warcrime...

 

[fr-rein]

As I noted here survived soldiers of 1941-1942 (small part of veterans of WWII) almost always wrote good about own comissars. Comissars after reforms of 1943 were other people.

I mean, yes, that's the survivor bias. If you survived and went through war well enough to later be able to write memoirs/tell others how it went then it wasn't too bad. Most people in 1941 weren't able to do it afterwards nor they would ever be allowed to tell that in Soviet times for understandable reasons.

My teacher of philosophy at the university was german Meyer. His familiy was deportated in Kazakhstan, they lived there like simple soviet citizens during evacuation. In 1944 he was mobilised and educated as pilot figher and fought in 1945 in Germany. In modern time he met May 9 like usual Soviet veteran. He didn't think that his deportation like warcrime...

I am not going to debate it, but I don't think that you would agree that state has a right to resettle you just because of some unconvenient genetic/national characteristic, do you?

 

[Kupr]

I mean, yes, that's the survivor bias. If you survived and went through war well enough to later be able to write memoirs/tell others how it went then it wasn't too bad. Most people in 1941 weren't able to do it afterwards nor they would ever be allowed to tell that in Soviet times for understandable reasons.

I based mostly post-USSR memoirs from

Фонд «Я помню». Память о прошлом - забота о будущем.

Наша задача через фильмы, книги, интервью, лекции передать историческое знание новым поколениям, вызвать ощущение причастности к истории России

iremember.ru

So they do not have any reasons to hide true. One veteran quoted here just directly wrote that he decided own problems in WWII by force, killing not only enemies.

I am not going to debate it, but I don't think that you would agree that state has a right to resettle you just because of some unconvenient genetic/national characteristic, do you?

It is opinion from modern situation. Situation in WWII was other. Nothing special. USA did same with own citizens of Japan nation. USSR did same.

 

[fr-rein]

I based mostly post-USSR memoirs from

Фонд «Я помню». Память о прошлом - забота о будущем.

Наша задача через фильмы, книги, интервью, лекции передать историческое знание новым поколениям, вызвать ощущение причастности к истории России

iremember.ru

So they do not have any reasons to hide true. One veteran quoted here just directly wrote that he decided own problems in WWII by force, killing not only enemies.

I don't imply that they lie.
What I say is that they have a bias from being on fringe of "successful" cases. There are very little memoirs from 1941-1942 soldiers who didn't make it or were captured, many had to face stigma of check by NKVD after liberation and obviously couldn't freely tell about failures until much later (if they survived to that date).

Another issue is a record bias: would be officers who misbehaved and were punished able to speak up against the commissars, especially if they were punished by party (by commissars report)?

Hence why I take such records with a grain of salt, they are used to retroactively prove effectiveness of the commissars but neglect actual issues because of which they were considered to be removed in the first place. The glorification of Red Army also makes criticism harder - there is so blatant falsification and glorification of fiction (Panfilov case, which was recently taken to the extreme side of glorification) that makes glorification of role of commissars relatively easy and done even without intent of falsification - just by spreading a certain bias formed by surviving records and soviet censorship.

It's also demonstrated in this thread for a bit as there is little information to give insight on what made Red Army abandon this institute and not restore it after war. Which isn't bad, but still results in having one-way views.

It is opinion from modern situation. Situation in WWII was other. Nothing special. USA did same with own citizens of Japan nation. USSR did same.

USA did recognize that it was injustice, even before WWII end, and later paid (not well though) reparations to the people and allowed them to return or offered new places to stay. Thankfully there were few dead.

It wasn't the case with USSR where it wasn't considered a crime until much later (1967), the deportation decision was maintained after Stalin's death and the passport system made it very hard to move, it wasn't talked about and people weren't allowed to return home until much later (very late 1980s/1990s). But what was most cynical was the deportation of actual Red Army soldiers after the war along with the deported nationalities, robbing them of their victory and possessions.

Lastly, even if others did something it doesn't make it not a crime. USA did recognize the injustice and acted to amend it. USSR only formally did so, it's amendment could happen only with Soviet collapse. Making injustice doesn't paint you irredeemably evil, the failure to act on it does.

But to not to further derail it, I just want to note that I used it as an example of actual crimes that happened and which state was more than willing to carry out, being more complicit in fueling hate and violence than the people. Hence why I don't think that commissars did any "good job" to prevent the violence in Germany, they were ones fueling hate in the first place... and as other participants showed, they weren't needed as a lot of conventional propaganda achieved about the same result. They could be called a convenient replacement of radio and panacea to illiteracy of soldiers however, although the latter does question effectiveness of the literacy program.

In short, while their contribution to the war effort was in no doubt big, the question of the effectiveness of the institution itself is still rather open.

 

[Kupr]

I don't imply that they lie.
What I say is that they have a bias from being on fringe of "successful" cases. There are very little memoirs from 1941-1942 soldiers who didn't make it or were captured, many had to face stigma of check by NKVD after liberation and obviously couldn't freely tell about failures until much later (if they survived to that date).

I think this sitution is not do special troubles to know finally truth about events. For example, my paternal grandfather (born in 1926) was in Bryansk area occupied by germans. Mobilised in 1943 17th years old and POW in november 1943 near Rogachev (officially KIA). Btw he served in Gorbatov's army:

Liberated in 1944 in Poland. So a lot of information exist about events. Even from former POW.

Another issue is a record bias: would be officers who misbehaved and were punished able to speak up against the commissars, especially if they were punished by party (by commissars report)?

My expirience, most punishments of officers and soldiers were done by third power in army (Special department officers, smersh later). Comissar was here as opinion of communist party to situation. Ussually it accepted it or gave good opinion about blamed one as good soldier.

Hence why I take such records with a grain of salt, they are used to retroactively prove effectiveness of the commissars but neglect actual issues because of which they were considered to be removed in the first place. The glorification of Red Army also makes criticism harder - there is so blatant falsification and glorification of fiction (Panfilov case, which was recently taken to the extreme side of glorification) that makes glorification of role of commissars relatively easy and done even without intent of falsification - just by spreading a certain bias formed by surviving records and soviet censorship.

Ok, let's look on real information about event with Panfilov's case.
Newspapers story was untrue, but... event/battle was. Journalist asked Panfilov's staff officers to point him event with most honored soldiers. Officers pointed battle of soldiers with politruk (Comissar) Klochkov. Officers thought they all KIA (In reality 4 soldiers survived).
German official information about event:
"Thereference to this action in all German archival files is limited to these three words recorded by the 2nd Panzer Division: “ferocious enemy resistance.” This
remark assessed resistance at Dubosekovo, defended by a company in which the 28 served, and at Shiriaevo, which was defended by another company, equally strong. The 2nd Panzer Division allotted two lines to elaborate on its general impression of the action on the morning of 16 November: the enemy was “weak but resisted stubbornly by using the advantages of rough
terrain.” (KTB, 2. Pz. Division (16 November 1941), BA-MA RH 27-2/21.)

So finally, I do not know any reason do not do "glorification of comissar Klochkov and his soldiers KIA in event (28 soldiers against 2. Pz. Division).
As I wtote above "Comissars and soldiers inspired by them were crushed under the tracks of a German military vehicle. But German military vehicle stalled because of it."

USA did recognize that it was injustice, even before WWII end, and later paid (not well though) reparations to the people and allowed them to return or offered new places to stay. Thankfully there were few dead.

Same could be in USA to population directly supported invaders?

 

[Kupr]

P.S. Recent russian movie is showing typical place of low and middle level comissars on battlefield in 1942:

Yesterday, I learned information that my grandfather participated in battle some kind like above. Kindergarten teacher asked parents to give family photo and stories about WWII for Defender of the Fatherland Day (February 23). I have informatioon that grandfather was KIA 13.11.1943 in 129 "Orel" rifle division. Russian WWII archives are being digitized all the time, but I still do not see Combat log of 129 "Orel" Rifle division for november 1943. I check it yesterday. It is absent, but I found Combat log of 63 Army.

Память народа::Подлинные документы о Второй Мировой войне

Память народа – Министерство обороны РФ и Корпорация ЭЛАР представляют крупнейший в мире Интернет-портал подлинных документов о Второй мировой 1939-1945 и Великой Отечественной войне 1941-1945.

pamyat-naroda.ru

12.11.1943:

Enemy:
The enemy in the SHERSTIN-NOVOSELKI sector with units of the 296th infantry division, with fire and counterattacks, supported by powerful artillery fire, sinometric fire (up to two regiments) and 15 self-propelled guns, put up stubborn resistance to the offensive of our units.
As a result of the battle, he was knocked out of the first line of trenches around NOVOSELKI, from 11-00 to 18-00 he made 10 counterattacks with a force of two companies to two battalions supported by 5-16 self-propelled guns from the NOVOSELKI areas.
The attacks were repulsed.
Artillery and mortars acted with powerful fire raids against the battle formations of our troops ...
***

Army troops:
***
After repeated attacks, overcoming strong enemy resistance, the 129 Rifle division in two companies broke into the trenches on the eastern outskirts of NOVOSELKI, but as a result of repeated enemy counterattacks, supported by Ferdinad self-propelled guns, they were knocked out.
A captured soldier of the 3rd Battalion of the 520th Infantry Regiment of the 296th Infantry Division showed that the division had replaced the 253rd Infantry Division, which suffered heavy losses.

13.11.1943:

Enemy:
The enemy, with units of the 296th infantry division and the 746 sapper battalion in the Sherstin-Novoselki sector, supported by powerful artillery and mortar fire (up to two artillery regiments, up to 15 mortar batteries and 10 six-barreled mortars), 5-7 self-propelled guns and tanks, provided fire and counterattacks stubborn resistance to the action of our units in the previous sector.

Army troops:
***
The advancing units, overcoming the stubborn fire resistance of the enemy and its barbed-wire obstacles by the 129th rifle division units, partially broke into the first trench of the enemy, but after stubborn hand-to-hand fighting, they could not advance further.
As a result of eight counterattacks followed one after another, supported by self-propelled guns and tanks, strong defensive fire and fire raids, 129 rifle division units were driven out of the first enemy trench.

***
Losses of 35 rifle corps (250, 129 and 287 Rifle Division) for 12.11.1943, killed 337 people, wounded 981 (Kupr comments: main battle was in 129 Rifle division)


14.11.1943:
Losses of 35 rifle corps (250, 129 and 287 Rifle Division) for 13.11.1943, killed 400 people, wounded 1310 (Kupr comments: main battle was in 129 Rifle division)

Spoiler

My grandfather was recorded as KIA in 13.11.1943.
In reality he was POW. I remember he said that last he remembered german grenade in trench around him.

 

[Kupr]

If to read memoirs, old generation freely went on german side at the begining of war remembering WWI and fathers/grandfathers stories about it. It stopped after RKKA (Working-People Red Army) started to liberate lands. Opinion changed. Plus, comissars propaganda in official newspapers like here:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dr-PemLX0AAa3cU.jpg

Some new additional info about it
Girl named in newspaper "Tanya". In reality she hid real name Zoya.
Impact of propaganda: Unknown killed naked girl just could be.... your sister.

Regarding violence in East Prussia. Zoya's younger brother fought in East Prussia. KIA during assault of Königsberg: