Nuremberg Trials-



Nuremberg Trials-

Also known as: International Military Tribunal; Nuremberg War Crimes

At the end of World War II in 1945, most of the surviving German Nazi leaders were captured by the Allies who occupied Germany that spring. They were placed on trial the next year for crimes against humanity. The Nazi regime, during its 12 years in power (1933–45), authorized and encouraged a remarkable degree of brutality toward its enemies and entire communities of people it considered unfit to live because they were considered racially inferior (Slavs), perceived as intent on the destruction of the Nordic race (Jews), or otherwise were socially undesirable (communists, homosexuals, and Roma). Concentration camps were established that for years sustained an industry of genocide in which inmates were starved, experimented upon, gassed, or simply worked to death. Perhaps as many as 12 million men, women, and children perished. In addition, tens of millions of others in areas occupied by the Germans and their allies were also murdered en masse. Russian prisoners of war died by the hundreds of thousands in camps that were totally inadequate to care for them under the rules of the Geneva Convention on the Treatment of Prisoners of War.

The Germans had been warned while the war was still in progress that they would be held responsible for their violations of human rights. However, even after it was increasingly evident that Germany would lose the war, the systematic murder of millions of defenseless civilians was still energetically pursued. In fact, the regime authorized an accelerated program of death to ensure that those perceived as enemies of Germany would not live to see its military defeat. Gas chambers and crematoriums were kept at full operation until literally the last days of the war. Concentration camp guards, when about to be overrun by the Western or Soviet military units, force-marched prisoners further into Germany's interior to prevent their liberation. German behavior during the war was one of the most horrendous examples of state terror in history.

Most of the Nazis on trial at Nuremberg argued that the tribunal, composed of judges from France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States, had no jurisdiction in Germany and no authority to pass judgment on them. In one sense, this defense had an element of merit. After all, there was little if any precedent to place on trial the political and military leadership of a country that had just lost a major conflict. There had been discussions in the aftermath of World War I about bringing to trial the kaiser and other high-ranking officials of the German state for war crimes, but no trials were ever held. The defendants argued that the trial was simply for show and that the victors were simply exercising revenge on those who were guilty.

Sentencing

At the conclusion of 216 court sessions, on October 1, 1946, the verdicts on 22 of the original 24 defendants were handed down. One defendant, Robert Ley, had committed suicide while in prison, and the aged Gustav Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach, the great German arms manufacturer, was judged mentally and physically unfit to stand trial. Of the 22 tried, three, Hjalmar Schacht, Franz von Papen, and Hans Fritzsche, were acquitted; four, Karl Dönitz, Baldur von Schirach, Albert Speer, and Konstantin von Neurath, were sentenced to 10 to 20 years in prison; three, Rudolf Hess, Walther Funk, and Erich Raeder, were sentenced to life imprisonment; and 12 were sentenced to be hanged. Of these, ten—Hans Frank, Wilhelm Frick, Julius Streicher, Alfred Rosenberg, Ernst Kaltenbrunner, Joachim von Ribbentrop, Fritz Sauckel, Alfred Jodl, Wilhelm Keitel, and Arthur Seyss-Inquart—were executed on October 16, 1946. Martin Bormann was tried and condemned to death in absentia, and Hermann Göring committed suicide before sentence could be carried out. The death sentences were carried out Oct 16th 1946 by hanging using the standard drop method instead of long drop. The French judges suggested the use of a firing squad for the military condemned, as is standard for military courts-martial, but this was opposed by several judges. They argued that the military officers had violated their military ethos and were not worthy of the firing squad, which was considered to be more dignified. The prisoners sentenced to incarceration were transferred to Spandau Prison in 1947.

Nuremberg established an important legal precedent that has since been pursued against heads of government who tolerate or implement brutal crimes against their own and/or other peoples. Serbian leader Slobodan Milošić and Iraqi president Saddam Hussein are the most recent examples of once powerful leaders who created and sustained a regime of terror, engaged in ethnic cleansing, and had individuals murdered sometimes on a whim. Nor are their underlings immune from prosecution. As Nuremberg demonstrated, a state terror apparatus that kills hundreds of thousands or tens of millions of people requires the active cooperation of countless police—military, bureaucratic, and judicial personnel—who may be called to account for their actions.

 Persico, Joseph. Nuremberg: Infamy on Trial (New York: Penguin Books, 1995); Tusa, Anna, and John Tusa. The Nuremberg Trials (New York: Cooper Square Publishers, 2003).

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. One of the most popular defenses for the defendants was that they were simply following orders. As officers in the military, the obligation to comply and follow orders is the ultimate duty. If one fails to promptly follow the order he has given, he would face punishments up to execution. What do you think of the “following order defense?”

2. Do you think there were any alternatives for the defendants in their actions during the war? If so, what alternatives?

3. The United States and its allies also carried out war acts such as bombing of Dresden, Germany, and the dropping of atomic bombs on civilian population. Technically, those acts were crimes against humanity. Do you think the United States and its allies should have been held legally liable for those acts?

4. What do you think of the merit and the effectiveness of the trials? Punishments?

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download