And so everyone in the correspondence, there is chatter about the soviet union. I dont remember the quote, a great quote about how at this point in the trial all the countries are working to gather, it has fallen apart. The Wartime Alliance during the nuremberg, comes under strain. The cold war flows into the court room. Really significant in terms of understanding the rhythm of the trial, what happens at the end of the trial. It is also critical for understanding for what happens. And that is great. It was. It is important to understand too this was all happening in the cold war context and to understand political origins and humanitarian origins this new language of human rights, that is one thing we look at. I would like to turn the program mac to maddie, thank you. From niccolo. Could you tell us why the allies, the military, what are the consequences of the decision. Part of why they decide to establish military tribunal. They dont have to follow all the rules of regular double trash tribunal. They have their own idea what a tribunal should look like. The british are reluctant, and and how is that going to work exactly. It is going to be more difficult or if it is a military tribunal the laws are somewhat different. That was made in negotiations early on because they see it as giving him the ability to do things and the condition is in a more straightforward way. From barbara. In world war ii, the nuremberg trials, nongermans, prosecuted and sentenced to death. The nuremberg trials and their organizations, axis powers, the japan trials, the japan tribunal that takes place later in the thing about nuremberg, after nuremberg, although countries have their own trials and they try war criminals from all different countries, they have the kind of romanian and bulgarian war criminals, and the way they are tried in these trials. In 1943. They cooperated with the germans, and in december of 1943. Wide publicity for, to deter soviet civilians, they carried out hundreds of trials for collaborators and captured german officers. The question regarding they wanted to include it in the statement. That this discredits the legal defense. It was included. I dont, i think that was part of the reason. Part of the reason western judges, the soviets include this evidence, included in the indictment and that plan is looking ugly. The indictment is published, get more information that confirms the soviets have done it. One of the biggest regrets in terms of the trial that happened but then the fact the soviets, scald to task the western judges overruling that. To contest soviet evidence, over two days, the fact that it disappears from the tribunal, that shows, it never was, what it was going to be and that doesnt happen. The soviets are very upset how that plays out as well. It seems the western powers gaining up on them, the western judges save the day on that. A followup question, the second question, the soviet role in selecting defendants. One of the reasons the soviets wanted an international tribunal, most defendants, big gun defendants, they were in american and british custody. They wanted us to participate in a trial of them. The soviets putting together some list of potential defendants and a list of generals they captured, they had a list, that the soviets bring in, the propaganda, they get a couple of defendants in there and are not major defendants. I will add to that the soviets wanted there to be a Second International tribunal. One of the ways they and the french thought nuremberg had fell was chinese industrialists, there was a hullabaloo with the prep case, that they had time for today. Most of the big industrialists by the end of the trial, jackson had it with the soviets, the british have two but all over the documents in terms of jackson being done and pretty much they decide the americans have an industrialist trial on their own. The soviets and friends are upset about it. A question about the nuremberg trials in the soviet union. How is that what was the reaction of the soviet people . A great question, a russian scholar looking more at the actual response in the soviet union to the soviet coverage and what was going on. It is hard to tell from documents that i looked at, there is soviet press coverage but the soviet press is a control trust, not a free press. The fact that it is covered in the soviet press, doesnt really tell us what people thought about the trials and what was going on. From memoirs, there was interest in the trials, if the news is any indication i thought anybody cared about what was going on, the thing to think about is what is happening in the soviet union, the soviets have been devastated. What does it look like to have a country where 27 million are dead, millions more are homeless, the amount of destruction, the focus is on rebuilding and trying to restart their lives not to say there is not interest but i never want to Say Something unless i have seen the document so i need to do more research in terms of perception and that is one of the things that is hard to get at. A final question from david. What impacts if any does the nuremberg trials have . You can probably extend that too, the lasting impression. This is something that is still debated in terms of the impact of the trial. Not nuremberg itself but what happens with the cold war coming in more that the nuremberg trial, it is supposed to reeducate the german public, what billy asked, what the soviets thought about it, the question of what most germans thought about it and a bunch of writers in germany at the time, and not much interest in the german population. And again, supposed to play a role in education, how do we measure that. In terms of the lasting impact, in terms of International Law and what happens at the United Nations in terms of the development of human rights legislation and genocide, all of this the nuremberg trials are foundational, the cold war comes in and the soviets afterwords at the same moment complaining about the americans and the british not cooperating in another set of trials, their documents, the ones i read talk about denazification is a huge failure because of letting people go and the americans and british our way too soft, another jurist organization, it is made of socialist states, they have proclamation after proclamation about the fact that denazification is not working and they go after remaining nazi criminals and not enough effort on that and the soviets, how many nazi leaders are let go as american rebuilding happens and the effort is on building a strong germany and the decision is made not to go through with the reparations payments. Very interesting after story as well. A huge thank you for a wonderful night and thanks to all of you. You can learn more, soviet judgment at nuremberg a new history of the international militaru tribunal after world war ii. An hour goes fast. In the chat box. Have a good night, keep reading and see you soon. Thank you for having me. This was really fun. Good night, everybody. You are watching cspan2, created by americas Cable Television company is a Public Service and brought to you today by your television provider. Live on tuesday the Supreme Court hears our argument in a consolidated case are questioning the constitutionality of the portal care act at 10 am eastern on cspan. At the same time on cspan2, naacp president Derek Johnson talks about the 2020 Election Results in the impact of black voters in the Racial Justice movement. At noon the senate is back to consider the nomination of james knapp to be a Us District Court judge for northern ohio. At 11 am eastern on cspan 3, Andrew Mccabe testifies before the Senate Judiciary committee as