Oasen Bataillon z.b.V. 300


That would be Oasis Special Purpose Battalion 300, in English. This peculiarly named unit proves that the Wehrmacht was not averse to a practical joke being played on its soldiers, since they probably never got anywhere near an Oasis. Instead of being based in a romantic palm-studded Arabic paradise with tough war-like men on horses and beautiful women wearing veils, they found themselves in dusty and stony dirtholes on the Libyan-Egyptian border, until they were forced to surrender following a long siege, in January 1942.


Fantasy: Siwa Oasis: the Village of Aghurmi (Art.IWM ART LD 2065) image: a desert oasis with palm trees to the left and right with ruins of a large building visible through the trees in the centre background. Two Arab men and two donkeys are visible in the centre of the composition. Copyright: © IWM.

indian Reality: ‘Some of the worst desert known to mankind’: INDIAN FORCES IN NORTH AFRICA DURING THE SECOND WORLD WAR (E 6940) Men of the 4th Indian Division with a captured German flag at Sidi Omar, North Africa. Copyright: © IWM.

Origin and Attachment

While I originally thought the battalion had been formed for service in the border fortifications following the visit to Africa of General Paulus (of later Stalingrad fame), this was not the case. The battalion was instead formed in response to a request made by the D.A.K. HQ to O.K.H. on 30 March, for garrison troops for oases through the desert, such as Gialo or Marada. The original request asked for five independent companies. The thinking was that these companies could act as flank and rear-area protection for traffic links and water supply points.

The battalion consisted of soldiers who had been to Africa before the war. While it is often reported as part of  Division z.b.V. Afrika (later 90th Light Division), it doesn’t appear that there was much of a connection at all. See e.g. the OOB of Division zbV at this link, which has no mention of Oasis Battalion 300. In the Panzergruppe OOB it is given as being directly under command of the Panzergruppe HQ.

From its formation until just before CRUSADER Division z.b.V. was of course responsible for the border sector, and as such would have had command of the battalion. Once the division was moved to Tobruk to prepare for the assault this relationship ceased however, and the batallion remained behind in the border fortifications. The relationship was probably similar to that of Major Bach’s I./S.R.104, which was under command of and supplied by Division z.b.V., but continued to belong to 5.Panzerdivision. It would be interesting to see who first came up with the idea they were under Division zbV.

Structure and Equipment

The battalion consisted of a battalion HQ, and five (on paper) identically equipped rifle companies, numbered 2., 6., 10., 12., and 13. As Frank Chadwick points out in the comments, this refelected the number of the administrative region (Wehrkreis) in which the company was formed.


Order of Battle – Oasenbatallion z.b.V. 300. Panzergruppe Africa Report. Rommelsriposte.com Collection

Each company had 12 light machine guns, 3 light mortars (50mm), and 6 light anti-tank rifles (7.92mm). with a reported company strength of 152 of all ranks (see here). As Frank also points out, the number of LMGs in the company is the standard infantry allocation, which was one per rifle squad plus a “floater” at platoon — three platoons with 4 LMG each = 12 guns. Thus, 12 LMG and 3 light mortars is right for a standard rifle company, while it is the number of light AT rifles which is high — two per rifle platoon instead of just one. While this was presumably intended to beef up the AT firepower of the companies, due to the 7.92mm AT rifle being obsolete at this point in the war, the battalion wasn’t strong in anti-tank firepower. In consequence, in position the companies of the battalion were supported by Italian and German artillery, including 88mm AA guns. This article at Lone Sentry is very helpful in describing the situation.

Screen shot 2019 02 06 at 1 48 22 pm

Detail of fortifications on the border at Sidi Omar, from 42 R.T.R. War Diary. UK National Archives, WO169/1421


The last remnants of the Oasis Battalion 300 went into Empire captivity when General Fedele de Giorgis, the Italian General Officer Commanding Savona infantry division and the border defense sector east was forced to surrender his forces to the 2 South African Division on 17 January 1942. Depite the rather short combat history, the battalion contributed to a stout defense of the border sector, forcing a deliberate reduction in two major operations, and this created a substantial headache for the Empire forces, as I laid out at this link. Prior to that, the last organised elements of the battalion had surrendered in Sollum on 12 January, apparently.

The battalion was never reformed, and provided little more than a footnote to the overall battle.

28 thoughts on “Oasen Bataillon z.b.V. 300

  1. “The battalion consisted of soldiers who had been to Africa before the war.”
    “The last remnants of the Oasis Battalion 300 went into Commonwealth captivity when General Fedele de Giorgis surrendered his forces on 17 January 1942.”

    … and with it, all the men who had prior expeirnce of the desert. Thus the risk of forming special purpose units then using them for banal purposes.


    • Pure speculation, but I think this probably shows some of the naivete of the German Army’s personnel planners in Berlin, who seem to have had little conception of the desert. I highly doubt that there was a need for specifically trained (beyond the basics) or experienced troops in this setting. I can understand why they formed the Afrika-Rgt. out of former members of the French Foreign Legion, but this battalion puzzles me.


      • Andreas,
        as a line formation, I agree. There are too many examples of regular combat units from all four corners of the world operating quite successfully in the desert environment, as long as they had /some/ time for acclimatisation, their kit was broadly suitable, and they were logistically supportted to a reasonable degree.

        However, in any environment, especially extreme ones, I think there is certainly a place for highly trained and or experienced personnel. Whether it be for things like the LRDG or Gebirgsjagers, or something more banal like providing advice or expert knowledge about the location of roads, water, landmarks, local contacts and customs and culture, whatever.

        By concentrating all their guys with this experience in one unit, then using them as a single formed unit in an exposed location, the Germans pretty much ensured they wouldn’t be around for any other purposes should the need arise.


  2. Nice find!

    Still, I don’t think a special unit would have been required to hold any of these Oasis. 🙂

    All the best



  3. The company numbers for the Oasis companies were those of the Wehrkreis from which each company was raised. The number of LMGs in the company is the standard infantry allocation, which was one per rifle squad plus a “floater” at platoon — three platoons with 4 LMG each = 12 guns. 12 LMG and 3 light mortars is right for a standard rifle company; it’s the number of light AT rifles which is high — two per rifle platoon instead of just one. I bet that’s because they were intended to operate in a semi-isolated environment.


    • Great to meet you Frank. I first played your game with a friend at university about 1985. Then bought a second hand copy on eBay about 10 years ago – struggle to find anyone to play face to face with but having bought another second hand game was able to devise a play by email system using Excel system to replace the column composition charts.
      A question if I may: do you know if the 7 infantry battalions in Division z.b.V Afrika were organised against motorised infantry KStNs or against ‘normal’ infantry KStNs?

      Cheers, Neil


      • Hi Neil. This is AFAICT, and happy to be corrected. They were organised as normal infantry, in fact Afrika Rgt 361 didn’t even have any heavy weapons or extra kit as they had been flown in just before the op started.




      • Hi Andreas, I think I have answered my own question:
        Checking against the Bayonet Strength website and other KStNs that I have found on the Sturmpanzer site and on the WWII day by day site I believe the KStN for ‘normal’ infantry had 12 LMGs in each of the 3 rifle companies and a MG company with 12 HMGs and 6 81mm mortars.
        The motorised infantry battalion by contrast had 18 LMGs and 2 HMGs in each of its 3 rifle companies and also included an infantry gun platoon with 2 75mm infantry guns and a MG company with 8 HMGs and 6 81 mortars.
        My supposition then is that the 7 battalions were organised against the motorised infantry KStNs. I appreciate the reality was that they weren’t fully motorised and nor were they fully equipped.
        I am happy to be convinced otherwise…




      • Hi Neil – I don’t think this is correct for the independent battalions that were sent. They were infantry, and retained this numbering until they were either lost during the Tobruk breakout or reorganised following CRUSADER. They were flown out in May 41 as an emergency measure. I have not seen any evidence that a different KStN was applied to them. For Afrikaregiment 361 note my earlier comment (i.e. organisation during CRUSADER was neither here nor there). I don’t have any evidence for reorg until into 1942. At the time of CRUSADER I would presume these all to be on infantry KStN.


      • Absolutely normal infantry at this time, at least so far as weaponry. Of course everything non-motorized sent to North Africa had a slightly altered TO&E making them “Partly motorized” (T. mot.) because animals complicated water supply in the desert. So horse-drawn infantry gun companies and supply columns were replaced with motorized transport. But at the weapon count level the units stayed infantry, and anyone who walked before still walked. That remained the case until the massive reorganization in early 1942.

        Love this site, by the way.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Thanks Andreas and Frank. Fine with that but if the KStN for ‘normal’ infantry had 12 LMGs in each of the 3 rifle companies and a MG company with 12 HMGs and 6 81mm mortars, i.e. a battalion total of 36 LMGs, 12 HMGs and 6 81mm mortars; then its odd that none of the 7 battalions had 36 LMGs. I understand that a number of the 1941 KStNs were destroyed later in the war, so its possible that there were special Afrika KStNs or that the battalions were issued more weapons than the KStNs called for.




  4. Pingback: A Hard Lesson Learnt « The Crusader Project

  5. Pingback: D.A.K. War Diary 30 March 1941 – The Crusader Project

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s