Eisenhower was chosen as commander of the Allies for a variety of reasons. One reason was his national identity. When Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt discussed possible leaders, several factors came into play. One was nationality of the commander. After the Casablanca Conference, the British and Americans promised the Russians that they would open a second front against the Germans. Originally, the leader of this grand invasion was going to be British Field Marshal Lorde Alanbrooke, yet the British shied away from this possibility due to a fear of losing face in Europe if the invasion failed. ^1 Additionally, Churchill, Roosevelt, and other leaders recognized that the majority of the manpower and equipment of the invasion force would be American. ^2 As a result, they agreed the commander must be American.

A second reason for Eisenhower’s appointment to Supreme commander was staff preference of Allied Political Leaders, most importantly Franklin Roosevelt. Besides Alanbrooke, Marshal was also considered for the position of Supreme Allied Commander, especially, since he was American. However, Roosevelt disagreed upon Marshals appointment to supreme army commander. Keegan remarks that Roosevelt did not want to spare Marshal since he was indispensable as Army chief of staff back in Washington. ^3 As a result, Eisenhower was the other logical choice as Supreme commander. He was already known by the Allied Brass at that point due to his role as Allied Commander during Operation Torch.

With all this in mind, one has to ask, “Why did Churchill acquiesce so easily to Roosevelt’s suggestion?” To put it briefly, Churchill liked and respected Eisenhower which leads me to my third point.

Eisenhower was made commander of the Allied Forces due to his personal relationship with Churchill. Churchill enjoyed talking with Eisenhower on almost a daily basis while he loathed his conversations with other peers of Ike, like Alexander Brook, a virtual enemy to the prime minister. ^4 Unlike Brook, Churchill showed a liking to Eisenhower due partly to their mutual love of history as D'este elaborates,

“Their mutual love of history became a bond. Churchill was happiest when discussing history and its lessons, and in Eisenhower he found not only a worthy accomplice but one of the few who could match him.” ^5

D'este also notes Churchill had a huge amount of respect for Ike by stating,

“Churchill’s genuine fondness for Eisenhower was readily discernible in the PM’s uncommon gestures of respect, such as invariably seating him to his right at dinner parties even though protocol dictated that the senior officer or politician present occupy that position of honor. That Eisenhower was typically junior to most of the officers present made no difference to Churchill, who himself relished flouting convention. Another example was his habit of personally walking Eisenhower to his staff car at the end of the evening, a gesture usually reserved for visiting royalty or statesmen.” ^6

Finally, the last reason Eisenhower was selected as Supreme commander was due to his intrinsic strategic ability to unite Allied factions and countries. When Churchill and Roosevelt decided to promote Eisenhower, they recognized that his talents were largely strategic rather than tactical.^7 Indeed, one of the most important characteristics for the Allied Commander required the willingness of leaders to put aside nationalistic differences.^8 Unlike Eisenhower, Alexander Brooke (another option for Supreme Allied Commander and an ideal poster boy of a multinational force) failed mainly due to his laissez faire style of command, failing to motivate British elements to properly support American forces at Salerno during the Italian campaign in 1943. ^9 Eisenhower contrasted Brookes by stressing Allied unity above all else as the foundation of his command, something which was seen in his early career as Allied Commander in Operation Torch. ^10

In conclusion, I would argue the Allies made Eisenhower the commander for some of the following reasons.

1. His national identity

2. Allied staff preference

3. Personal relationships and biases of Allied leaders, like Churchill.

4. His strategic focus to unite Allied factions and countries as the foundation of his command.

Sidenote

The decision for Allied Supreme Commander rested with one man, Franklin Roosevelt. ^11 Also, the decision was made during the events of the Tehran Conference in November/December 1943. One of the most dominating factors in that conference was the Russian (Stalin’s) agenda. Stalin remained unconvinced that an Allied invasion would take place until an Allied commander was selected. ^12 Because of Stalin’s doubt, Churchill encourage Roosevelt that a decision should be made within a week. ^13

When making the choice for commander, Roosevelt recognized the fact that Churchill played a large part in his decision. D’este states,

”Churchill warmly embraced Eisenhower as the new supreme commander. Doubtless it was not lost on Churchill that Eisenhower was a more preferable choice than Marshal, with whom he had clashed on more than one occasion. Not only was Marshall less tolerant of the PM’s powers of persuasion and coercion, but he was not someone with whom Churchill would have had anything other than a businesslike relationship.” ^14

With this in mind, Roosevelt remarked to his son that he decided to appoint Eisenhower due to the fact that, “Eisenhower is the best politician among the military men.” ^15

Sources

1. D’este, Carlos. Eisenhower: a Soldiers Life. New York: Henry Holt and Company LLC, 2002.

2. Keegan, John. The Second World War. New York: Penguin Books, 1989.

3. Puryear, Edgar. 19 Stars: a Study in Military Character and Leadership. Novato: Presedio Press, 1981.

Further / Recommended Reading

1. Eisenhower, David. Eisenhower at War 1943-1945. New York: Juldee Inc., 1986.

2. Churchill, Winston. The Second World War. Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1950.

Footnotes

1. Edgar Puryear, 19 Stars: a Study in Military Character and Leadership (Novato: Presedio Press, 1981), 173-174.

2. John Keegan, The Second World War (New York: Penguin Books, 1989), 375.

3. Keegan, The Second World War, 375

4. Carlos D'este, Eisenhower: a Soldiers Life (New York: Henry Holt and Company LLC, 2002), 330.

5. D'este, Eisenhower, 331.

6. D'este, Eisenhower, 331.

7. Keegan, The Second World War, 375.

8. Puryear, 19 Stars, 173.

9. D'este, Eisenhower, 454.

10. Puryear, 19 Stars, 175.

11. D’este, Eisenhower, 466.

12. D’este, Eisenhower, 466.

13. Keegan, The Second World War, 375.

14. D’este, Eisenhower, 467-468.

15. D’este, Eisenhower, 467.

You might be interested in this thread from some months back, as it asks a similar question to you:

• How did Dwight D. Eisenhower go from being a Lt. Gen in 1942 to being named the Supreme Allied commander a little over a year later, and not someone else?

The top comment there mentions his ability to both talk to political leadership and manage the personalities of other Generals.