Transcripts For CSPAN2 Book Discussion On The Nazi Hunters 2

My name is howard unger and on behalf of the United States Holocaust Memorial museum it is my honor to welcome you to todays program title, a relentless pursuit bringing holocaust perpetrators to justice. I am the son of holocaust survivor and have served on the council for the u. S. Holocaust museum for the past five years. Ive come to learn that the museum is so much more than just a building that houses exhibits. The museum researches history cup trees educators, members of the military and judiciary, both in the u. S. And internationally and has many programs focus on preventing the future genocides from occurring again. Here in new york, the museums northeast Regional Office offers a variety of of events including talks like the one you are about to hear, plus Film Screenings and programs on holocaust histories as well as contemporary genocides and antisemitism. Tomorrow, well be holding the same program at the synagogue and mount cisco new york. So please encourage your westchester friends and family to join us there tomorrow evening at 7 45 p. M. Tonights program is a part of a conversation that the u. S. Holocaust Memorial Museum is holding nationwide, examining the role each of us has a when confronted with difficult and complex challenges. Only in recent history has International Law evolved to define and punish a Mass Violence against civilians. Out of the devastating crimes of the holocaust the allied powers were forced to bring state actors to justice for unspeakable crimes, never before tried in a court of law. A small percentage of nazi officials and collaborators were brought to trial in the immediate postwar period. As years passed, the Global Community largely lost interest in pursuing the remaining perpetrators. However, a few remarkable individuals continue to work to bring nazi criminals to justice. These later trials continue to influence national law. Law grows through standing of president s. In other words, how judges apply the laws helps determine what the law means. Through the judgments of these tribunals and courts, International Law International Law on genocide and crimes against humanity evolved. It deepens our understanding of the crime and our capacity to respond. Today, our outstanding panel will discuss how these president s were created and applied, the figures who help carry them out and the ongoing legacy of this history. It is now my pleasure to introduce our special guest. Andrew nagorski, journalist and author of the new book, the nazi hunters, and doctor lawrence douglass, chair of law, law, jurisprudence and social at Amherst College and author of, the right and wrong man, and the last great nazi war crimes trial. Our moderator this evening is doctor elizabeth white, his strain with the United States Holocaust Memorial museum. She goes by barry when they you hear them talking to her that way youll understand. Following the program both authors will be outside in the lobby to sign copies of their book. Thank you. [applause]. [applause]. Good evening everyone. Just so we are straight on whos who, im doctor Elizabeth Barry white , this is lawrence douglas, and andrew nagorski. I think you all for coming out tonight and for participating in this program. This has been a future of warfare since the dawn of Human History, and to the extent that perpetrators were ever made to account for their actions it was true victors justice, ask of retribution by the winning side against the losers. But during world war ii the ally signaled that things were going to take a different approach. Late in 1943 as it became clear that not to germany was going to lose the work, the leaders of the United States, great britain, and the soviet Union Announced that the perpetrators of nazi atrocities would be brought to trial under the laws of the country where they committed their crimes. And the major nazi leadership would face joint punishment by the ally. Andy, did the signal that allies definitely decided they are going to forgo a vengeance in favor of justice . What do they hope to accomplish by putting nazi criminals on trial . Not really, innocence that justice and vengeance were inevitably intertwined at the end of the war. In 1943 the declaration that you cited there was a lot of fighting ahead, all the way to berlin. A lot a lot of it was very vicious and the red army and suffered massive losses and theyre getting revenge among others not just on the military, but for instance rapes by the army are estimated to be close to 2 million in germany. But, there you have that declaration which was a novel idea that instead of exact vengeance you do seek justice. Right away, six weeks later at the toronto conference, stalin says to roosevelt and churchill, well i have an idea of justice, lets line up 50000 or 100,000 of the top german commanders and lets shoot them. That will be justice. Churchill was horrified and roosevelt said something like, old like lets have a compromise and shoot 49,500. Its not go over well with churchill. But whats interesting, goes back and forth whats interesting, goes back and forth and eventually stalin and roosevelt decide they do want to trial for different reasons. Stalin love show trials and in the 30s they had picked trials but roosevelt really wanted this principle and churchill was aware of the danger of a show trial and he suddenly, he recently declassified documents we found out that at one point he was considering a plan to just have summary execution of the few top leaders and some just in prison without trial. So so this backandforth, eventually the trials happened as we know. It was unprecedented, but every step of the way has been controversy override up until todays. And what were the reasons they opted to go for the trials, word their particular goals besides just Holding People for countable . Besides Holding People Holding People accountable and someone has to be punished for the horse, theres the educational element was there. Was very early, president truman said at one point, what these trials are meant to do is to make it impossible for someone to say, now or anytime in the future that these things did not happen. That is why immediately you had at the trial, documents, film, witnesses, in some cases witnesses in some cases documentation, but it was to set the record straight because so many people were in denial of what it happened of course especially in germany and austria, but elsewhere the world people were only beginning to grasp the magnitude of what happen. So was the particular focus on the german people to kind of show them the evils that have been done in their name in . Yes. That was the priority of first. And why we fight this war. But there was immediate opposition, for instance in the United States there is opposition from both the left and right which that this is a victors justice. For the people who went into the concentration, and liberated them, they said no, this is not victors justice, this is just justice. Lawrence you are the legal expert here, the charges before the International Military tribunal at noon burke were crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity. At least some of these word new terms. Did the International Legal community consider these to be wellfounded in existing law . Or some of them particularly controversial . Is and he said the whole trial was developed in controversy. We have to remember that this is the First International criminal court in Human History. In certain respects not only were the 21 individual defendants on trial but law itself was on trial. That is to extend the allies committed to doing a Trial Program is a post education they had to demonstrate that law was an adequate tool for dealing with crimes of this magnitude. So they wanted to certainly make sure that whatever charges were brought against these defendants that they had adequate grounding in International Law. Now that said, i think we need to bear in mind that the nurnberg child trial, the famous one before the tribunal was not in the first instance a holocaust trial. As he mentioned, the principal charge that was brought against the defendant at nuremberg was that they had waged an aggressive war in violation of International Law. That charge of waging an aggressive war, that has not showed a lot of durability since norman burke. And even at the time it was involved in controversy. Victors justice was most applied to the charge of waging an aggressive war because the question merged sense when in Human History was waging war cry. It might be something you dont like, might be something we disagree with, but since when was it a crime . The answer charges that were brought were crimes, war brought were crimes, war crimes was established in International Law. Crimes against humanity, my my mind was the most distinctive contribution that nuremberg made. It was through the challenge of crimes against humanity that most of the evidence of crimes of the holocaust entered the nurnberg child and i think we can say with 70 plus years of hindsight that crimes against humanity were the most distinctive and legal breakthrough of the nuremberg trial. And crimes against humanity includes what kind of actions . It basically included what we can describe as systematic attacks on civilian population. We have to remember that genocide, which is a term that we all would use today to describe the nazis exterminator practices, genocide was only client as a term in 1944. 44. A year before the trial started. It was coined by lemkin who was a Legal Advisor, polish jewish Legal Advisor to the u. S. War department. So even though today it stands as an independent crime in International Law, the time of nuremberg it was still a very much new new term. It does emerge in the trial itself, if you you look particular at the Closing Arguments of the prosecutors, they start to use this new term but the new term of genocide is basically says the description of the nazis crimes against humanity. I think it was in the indictment. Exactly per day in the indictment it is mentioned as a war crime then in the Closing Argument of the lawyers of the prosecutors then they just start describing it as a crime against humanity. Well if youre going to hold trials you have to present evidence to support the charges. So late in the war the United States army formed war crimes investigative teams. Whose mission it was to accompany combat troops as they fought their way across germany and to seize and collect evidence of nazi war crimes. So lets take a look at how this worked according to Nuremberg Prosecutor been friends. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] in order to have a successful prosecution you have to have beyond reasonable doubt that no crime has been committed, to if you havent got both at the same time you have nothing. Between 1945 and 1948 there 1948 there were thousands of trials of nazi criminals by the alleys in germany and also by the countries that suffered under german occupation. Andy, you have written about some of the trials, can you highlight some that you think were particularly significant, or controversial . There are several but i will point to three. I will start and get back to bed in a moment. But with poland thursday investigator who was from a polish family of german origin, and as i discovered researching his story it turns out his brother during the occupation had actually registered as an ethnic germany became the mayor of the small town and disappeared after the war. To write his whole life story handed is i think the most trawling document of the holocaust because here he explains how he is working so hard to put men and women into the gas chambers but i dont have time to play with my own kids across the yard and he understood the value is on record everybody tried was on record later it was used as the auschwitz trials so of course, he was hanged in 1947 but was much of the verdict in the outcome is what was produced if you dont know, deferences still live 96 years old and 5foot tall and an amazing person. I went with my wife he was just back from the jim showing by white his biceps is in the florida. [laughter] at age 27 the prosecutor were the special killing squads on the eastern front. This is a form of mass murder and a researcher found all the records how many people were killed on this day and the next day he said i sat down with my calculator and adding machine when they reach 1 million stop counting. And the prosecutor for the followup trials and they said we dont have that budgeted but he does that age 27 than they are prosecuted in very well educated commanders is a fascinating and more bad case but it encapsulates of what happens. Eventually only four were hanged. Finally and other u. S. Army prosecutor was in charge of the dachau trials to get those who were actually there carried out the worst work of killing and torturing prisoners. And he espoused a theory called a common design that if you were part of the machinery were guilty whether or not if you killed person x y or z. This is a complete contradiction to the of their case of that controversy was set up. His chiles were overshadowed by one case of the widow of the longest serving commander in was known for going around and flaunting her sexuality and then to respond in any way. Will also to have prisoners with tattoos with the lamp shades made of their skin. A lot of this became dubious and later this sentence was reduced and they were furious in washington but even when west germany wanted to end a triose but committed suicide in prison. After 1948 the allies war Crime Program petered out. And by 1958 everyone who was convicted but not executed was free. So the reasons for the change that we have accomplished. There are three and answers. One is the cold war the second is the cold for the third is the cold war. It is the reality were at some point that we needed west germany as an ally and it was really a calculation to appease the germans and they turned against the War Crimes Program really aggressively and that the time of the nuremberg trials the germans were sympathetic but at least in the polls taken by the americans express their support for the trials with the additional trials that amd was describing continued that was like grabbing a hour face of the crimes with a transition to the denver Credit Society obviously there was a tremendous number of nazis to continue to occupy the power within the legal apparatus of west germany in those persons have little support of aggressive war Crime Program so was the soviet union emerged as theyre principal antagonist of the United States in the United States calculated it was an ally then the americans were willing to do a lot for the support of germany basically a commuting sentences of the perpetrators of genocide. One very specific example the man who became head of the first cia the oss that was the predecessor of the german shoe who have left as a teenager in the 30s and then came to an end states to become in the army in then the cia. He said i was not interested in fighting but it is time to move on even despite his family ties he really felt that very strongly. You talk of raw the pursuit of justice for the crimes in the focus of that era after the Trial Program so your book focuses on specific individuals to play a very different rule role of the pursuit of justice hidy pick your subjects and why is this a good way to approach the topic . When you say not to hunters and i know many people have qualms about it but there were two essential groups the government or the military prosecutors in those who had the authority and then the freelance not see hunters like holocaust server 81 dash survivors those who made it their mission to push these issues when it was unpopular and when that situation happened and governments were dropping this very quickly in the is the policy and as a controversial character but to keep the issue alive and not allowing people to forget it but what intrigues me as a reporter with the collapse of communism dash struck by history is so inevitable. But in fact, it is not true of my experience i say there are two things about the people i write about determination and huts buff. And tuesday at one case at 27 to say i could take on the case he guarded the bath then just walked in when he was sure she was in bed was so impressed invited him to lunch with the general. [laughter] it is that determination not to be stops you have people who were very strongly motivated of brady was from a secular jewish family and then came back and was determined to make dead germans face up to their past when sentiment was running against it then eventually providing the key points for the case so everywhere and later on in the United States she is not jewish but she grew up with the juror read fellow much of even though her father had died in auschwitz she learns about this and then goes after the nazis river she saw them and then with the chancellor of west germany she actually got on and was taking by with their press credential in she shouted you not see this is 1958 when kennedy was assassinated she could have been shot so some people took incredibly dramatic action. See you have