The Situation

Confused and disorganized, the Wehrmacht was retreating across France and the Lowlands. Ever since the St. Lo breakthrough Allied pressure had been relentlessly applied, giving the enemy no time to rally his forces for a stand. He was careening toward the Siegfried Line where, if permitted, he could be expected to catch his breath and establish a defensive position.

To the Allies the Siegfried Line presented a formidable obstacle. To penetrate the heart of the German homeland it was necessary to pass, not only this system of fixed defenses with its artfully constructed tank traps, minefields, and fire-control points, but also that natural barrier, the river Rhine.

Why not accomplish both aims at once? Why not do it now, while enemy forces were still reeling?

The logical place to achieve the double result of flanking the Siegfried Line and crossing the Rhine was at Arnhem, on the Neder Rijn in Holland. Once across the river here, Allied troops would be beyond the right flank of the Siegfried defenses and in position to swing behind them and on into the Fatherland. The flat terrain of northern Germany remaining beyond Arnhem offered a favorable route for armor.

Just as Arnhem was the most likely point of attack, the most feasible method was an airborne operation. With paratroops and glider borne units to seize strategic bridges and landing fields, it was estimated that armored and infantry forces could push rapidly forward and take over control. The all-important factor was to hit the enemy at this most vulnerable point before he could gather his resistance. It is well for those inclined to criticize the timing of the operation to consider this imperative need for immediate action. Had the attack proved completely successful, the results of this boldly conceived plan would have amply justified the risks involved. Not that the Holland assault can be deemed a failure; it was possibly 80 per cent successful, since the Allied front was advanced 48 miles in the northern sector and only one difficult river crossing remained.

It was the consensus of both United States and British airborne staffs and of the IX Troop Carrier Command (IX TCC) staff that of all airborne operations in the European theater to date, this was the most brilliantly conceived, planned, and executed. Not only did the air component and the forces it carried perform creditably, but losses were far smaller than anticipated. The units carried out their assigned missions, according to plan as modified by weather and enemy reaction, in such manner as to clear the way for Lt. Gen. Miles C. Dempsey's armor, in case it came through close to schedule. Tactical air preparation was thorough. Troop carrier operations, depending heavily upon available radar and radio aids, were precise and definite, utilizing to great advantage the experience of IX TCC in other theaters. Due to air preparation and the high degree of saturation attained in the area, troop carrier and glider losses were not only lower than expected, but were probably not one-quarter so great as would have been incurred by night, when higher operational losses may be looked for. The airborne divisions, (United States 82d and 101st and British 1st) acquitted themselves as only airborne units with considerable experience could have done. The 82d Division in a series of bitter fights captured a number of vital bridges prior to the arrival of the Guards Armoured Division and then, assisted by the latter unit, engaged in the desperate assault on the important Nijmegen bridge so vital to the success of the ground operation and, by that time, to the relief of the hard-pressed British 1st Airborne Division. Operations of the 101st Airborne Division, which repulsed with bazookas and artillery a charge of 30 tanks, were equally spectacular. However, while this booklet inevitably discusses to some extent the activities of the ground forces in the Battle of Holland, it is primarily the air component which concerns us here.