Monday, June 23, 2003
Front Page
News
Op-Eds
Features
Literary
Lighter Side
Letters
About Us
About Romblon
Search
Previous Issues
Links

Join Romblon List
Message Board

Advertise with Us
Contact Us
Feedback

Classified Ads

THE BATTLE FOR MANILA
by Richard Connaughton, John Pimlott
and Duncan Anderson.
Presidio Press, 1995. 244 pp. Hardcover
P24.95



Reviewed by Maximo P. Fabella

 


There seems to be renewed interested in looking at World War II
battles, five decades after the events. One such book is the earlier book by Thomas J. Cutler, THE BATTLE OF LEYTE GULF, oCT. 23-26, 1944.

Manila's liberation resulted in so much devastation. Are there lessons to be learned from urban fighting? The authors, British military historians seems to think so.

Three of them comes to mind. The first, defense of a city is most difficult. Second, seizing a defended city is time-consuming and costly, requiring specially trained forces. Both factors were absent from the American response to Manila.

The third factor, never surround a city entirely, but always leave an escape route, so that the enemy is not forced to fight to the death.

The authors aver that the devastation could not be entirely be blamed on the soldiers. The fault lies with commanders who had not prepared their troops for such a battle, and who once presented with the need to take the city by force, preferred to answer the problem with firepower.

A retrospective view of the battle presents advantages.There is a body of literature about the subject matter, including official histories, and reminisces of participants. Hindsight, in favor of foresight.

The authors are militariay historians/teacheers are looking for some "lessons" learned. Accounts by Americans and Filipino participants are solicited. Numerous books, journals, and magazine articles have come out.

The problem, is really more of sorting out from all the mountains of facts, to be able to weave a readable narrative.

The book concludes and this reviewer agrees that perhaps it was an "unwanted" battle. Why did it take place? Was it avoidable?

I would not agree that Manila was never a "center of gravity". It has to be, precisely, because, of the emotional ties General MacArthur felt. It was to him an obsession of his promise to return.

Notice that as soon as they landed in Lingayen, MacArthur insisted on speed towards Manila. Book asserts that MacArthur was planning a victory parade. This and other considerations clouded his military judgement.

Gen. Kruger, favored bypassing Manila and let it wether on the vine. However, a promised command of an army group, made him more amenable.

The 11th Airborne, which landed in Batangas was not suited for deep advance. It was a small, not equipped with heavy artillery or sufficient vehicles.

The Japanese for their part, were divided as to how to respond to American attacks on Leyte. One group wanted to make a "decisive" battle, just like the Leyte Gulf naval battles.

Yamashita, the ground commander, wanted to inflict a guerrilla-style damage while withdrawing to the mountains, making Baguio as headquarters.

His decision was what came to pass.

Yamashita did not declare Manila and "open city". The Japanese Navy looked at Vice Admiral Okuchi, for orders. Rear Aadmiral Iwabuchi, had control of the Manila Naval Forces. Repeated orders from Yamashita to pull out of Manila were not obeyed. By that time communications with the Baguio headquarters was at best sporadic, due to chronic shortages of transport, and disruptive guerrilla activities.

The Americans in Manila faced with an array of defensive capability, plus improvisation of the Japanese. The Americans knew that there were close to a million civilians. They did not have the accurate information as to the defensive position of the Japanese.

Previous campaigns included massive naval and air bombardment, followed by concentrated artitllery fire. The Japanese defenders constructed street barricades, pillboxes from concrete, metal, wood and earth.....all designed to absorb infantry fire.

The (Japanese) made effective use of buildings, private homes, churches and schools designed to withstand earthquake, plus the natural defenses of Intramuros (walled city). In the American desire to minimize infantry casualties, the Americans lost sight of the need to the protect Filipino civilian population.

The book is highly recommended to military students and teachers, for interested readers, and Philippine experts. If one learns from "lessons" extracted from battles, this one is one such book!

mpf 5/20/03

 

 

Maximo P. Fabella
Orange Park, Florida