Why Himmler did not defend Auschwitz?

[panzertruppe2001]

January 27 th 1945: The Red Army occupied Auschwitz. The Russian occuped the camp without German resistance.

Why Hitler did not sent the LAH, the Das Reich, the Totenkopf, and other elite and political loyal units to Auschwitz zone to prevent the Russian discovered the crimes? Searching in http://www.Feldgrau.com this units were in Hungary trying to prevent the Red Army entered in Budapest
Was Budapest more important than Auschwitz for Hitler?

I mentioned Auschwitz because was the archetype of the Nazi extemination camp, but i suppose the other camps (Treblinka, Chelmno, Stutthof, Belzec, etc)were not defended too.

Thanks

[Witch-King of Angmar]

January 27 th 1945: The Red Army occupied Auschwitz. The Russian occuped the camp without German resistance.

Why Hitler did not sent the LAH, the Das Reich, the Totenkopf, and other elite and political loyal units to Auschwitz zone to prevent the Russian discovered the crimes? Searching in http://www.Feldgrau.com this units were in Hungary trying to prevent the Red Army entered in Budapest
Was Budapest more important than Auschwitz for Hitler?

I mentioned Auschwitz because was the archetype of the Nazi extemination camp, but i suppose the other camps (Treblinka, Chelmno, Stutthof, Belzec, etc)were not defended too.

Thanks

Treblinka and other Aktion Reinhard camps had been dismantled, razed to the ground, and the ground ploughed... one full year before. From Auschwitz itself, not much was left standing.

~The Witch-King of Angmar

[panzertruppe2001]

January 27 th 1945: The Red Army occupied Auschwitz. The Russian occuped the camp without German resistance.

Why Hitler did not sent the LAH, the Das Reich, the Totenkopf, and other elite and political loyal units to Auschwitz zone to prevent the Russian discovered the crimes? Searching in http://www.Feldgrau.com this units were in Hungary trying to prevent the Red Army entered in Budapest
Was Budapest more important than Auschwitz for Hitler?

I mentioned Auschwitz because was the archetype of the Nazi extemination camp, but i suppose the other camps (Treblinka, Chelmno, Stutthof, Belzec, etc)were not defended too.

Thanks

Treblinka and other Aktion Reinhard camps had been dismantled, razed to the ground, and the ground ploughed... one full year before. From Auschwitz itself, not much was left standing.

~The Witch-King of Angmar

Thanks for the answers but my doubts grow instead of diminish
If not much of Auschwitz was left standing. Why actually we can visit the camp in Poland, and i suppose other camps in Poland can be visited today.
Reading some post in this Forum i can know that Auschwitz was used as a prisoner camp for the Russian, so was very difficult that "not much was left standing"
And as far as i know today you can visit Treblinka and Belzec, so we have two deductions
1) The camps were not razed to the ground
2) The camps were not razed to the ground and the Polish government rebuilt them

[henryk]

Treblinka has no original structures, nor was it rebuilt. There are only new monuments and memorials. Eg concrete bars and platform represent the original steel railway tracks and wooden platform.

[David Thompson]

panzertruppe2001 -- You said:

Thanks for the answers but my doubts grow instead of diminish

Since your original question involved the failure of the SS to defend the camps, what doubts are you talking about?

[F.N.]

Why would the SS try to protect it? I don't think it was of strategic importanse. and as for the extermination, I don't think they could have continued with it, and at the same time try to keep the Russians away.

[Johnny]

I think the question is a legitimate one. When Hitler gave vauge reasons for defending parts of Ostland (Swedish Iron ore being one of the reasons according to some authors?) And since many of the nazi elite (not neceserely Himmler in the end) concidered the concentration camps to be vital to the war effort how come they were so easily abandoned?
No strategic importance, well that is certainly true but Hitler's defence policies weren't always of a strategic or even logical nature. Hitler or Himmler or someone else at the top must have realized that the closing down of Auschwitz must have ment a decrease in the daily murder rate. How come this was such an easy part of the reich to close down and abandon when other things such as towns and military bases were fought to the death for (often lacking in strategic importance aswell)?