Late last week, Polish authorities reopened the investigation into crimes committed at Auschwitz-Birkenau during World War II.
The investigation was shelved in the 1980s because it was too difficult to complete under the Communist regime at the time. The Institute of National Remembrance – a research body affiliated with the Polish government – stated last week that the main “purpose of the investigation is a thorough and comprehensive explanation of the circumstances of” the crimes that took place at Auschwitz. But many are skeptical as to the success that this probe will have. According to Slate, “the leading national Nazi hunter,” Efraim Zuroff, is not convinced that the investigation will yield any convictions because most of the victims of Nazis and some Nazis themselves are deceased. However, the ability of this investigation to procure convictions should not be the standard by which it is judged. Instead, the inquiry can be used as a step towards demonstrating to the world that those that perpetrate war crimes will no longer be seen as less criminal than those who order these crimes to be carried out. This should force the International Criminal Court to investigate the lesser-known and lower level participants in its current inquiries into war crimes in such countries as Uganda and the Central African Republic, as well as those in the future.
While many people are discounting this investigation because of its predicted inability to secure convictions, mere exploration into the war crimes of World War II could be enough to demonstrate that committing horrific offenses as a result of following orders is not pardonable. During November 2010, there were “852 ongoing investigations of Nazi war criminals,” though there are certainly others living in secret, according to Slate. From the past decades, these people have essentially been getting away with their crimes, living quiet lives among the families of their victims. All because they aren’t criminals of the same caliber as those prosecuted at Nuremburg or Dachau. They were the lower ranking members of the Gestapo and the SS, following orders and murdering and torturing innocent people. For this reason, lower-ranking soldiers should not be left to live their lives after war: They should be prosecuted just like their superior officers have been. Lower-ranking soldiers are just as guilty as the upper command and should be treated as such.
In the years that have followed the Holocaust, genocides have continued to happen and the guilty, low-ranking soldiers continue to be excused – at least complacently – by society. This can be seen in the cases prosecuted by the International Criminal Court. The ICC continues to prosecute only leaders of the wars. The case of Darfur is a perfect example of this. The ICC is focused more on indicting Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir for crimes against humanity than it is on finding and prosecuting the members of Janjaweed who carried out his orders. The ICC’s lack of interest in the participation of lower-level Janjaweed members is symbolic of the deeper apathy felt toward obedient perpetrators of war crimes.
The re-launched investigation into Auschwitz can be the way to address this problem, even without convictions by the Institute of National Remembrance. Instead, this Polish body can make inquiries, form conclusions, make indictments, and leave obtaining convictions to the German government. In the past year, Germany has been able to convict John Demjanjuk “based on the theory that if he worked there, he was part of the extermination process, even without direct proof of any specific killings,” according to the Huffington Post. This new German precedent, along with the fact that Berlin asks to be allowed to extradite Nazi war criminals, gives new hope for convictions. Hopefully, the investigation by this Polish institution and convictions by the German government together can demonstrate that the obedient soldier who commits mass murder as a result of orders is just as guilty as the commander giving the orders. Establishing such a precedent in Germany will help expand this to an international model of prosecuting both rank-and-file soldiers and their leaders.
Photo Credit: mrbill
The Discussion
In situations of mass atrocities wide-spread prosecutions are often impossible and sometimes detrimental to the peace process. We should look instead to models such as Rwanda's Gacaca courts or S.A.'s Peace and Reconciliation Commissions as a guide for acknowledging crimes and healing communities.
In my opinion, this is not about the crimes that happened, but the fact that we want to say "we're better than that now". As you article says the chance for actual justice is minuscule if it even exists. Polish investigations 60+ years after the events won't have an effect on prosecutions elsewhere today, nor will it change the fact that in an act so large and brutal as the Holocaust, it is inevitable that so very many guilty of unconscionable murder will be allowed to go back home and live out their life (as in many wars). Try and punish too many, and then you end up punishing a whole society, one of the reasons WWII happened in the first place. That's why you go after the leaders and worst offenders and not every single person.
I absolutely agree with what you are writing on the Holocaust and recent Auschwitz trials. However, the big difference to the other cases is that Europe is in peace now that these extensive prosecutions take place. Conducting them in a newly war turn society or while the war is still ongoing (Darfur
5 Replies
The author's bald claim that those who were "only following orders" are 'just as guilty' as those who gave the orders is highly counter-intuitive. Military orders are backed up with the implicit threat of force, and if one is forced to do something then why should one be held accountable for it?
1 Replies
This is a truly great idea!
Now we can prosecute all pilots and crew who firebombed Dresden during the war; this was a civilian city of high culture, flooded with refugees and because there was no significant military presence there, destroying this city was undeniably a war crime. Go get em !!! :-)
This is a very important essay, Ms. Pitcher. Our country prosecutes nickel and dime crimes every day. We put people in prisons using mandatory sentencing for minor crimes. How can we not pursue the animals who killed and mutilated 6 million innocent people because of their religion? Where is the outrage? There is no statute of limitations on murder. Time is running short to find the last of the scum who had no hesitation about gassing other humans. The global community should not waste a moment in this regards. I, for one, will not forget the horrendous acts committed during the Holocaust.
I think your story is interesting and well written. I think what you want is a great idea, but how would you execute it? How would international courts have time to prosecute everyone? How would you get the international community to catch on to such an idea if they do not have resource like national governments? Wouldn't international tribunals argue that national governments should be responsible for lower level crimes?