points of view

Commentary

Nuremberg, Eichmann 'trialr
Yield A Challenge For Today

Washington/JTA

criminals for atrocities they committed
not only against their own citizens, but
also those of other nations. It rejected
the longstanding doctrine of sovereign
immunity, which exempted heads of
state from prosecution for actions taken
while in office, and the doctrine of supe-
rior orders, which protected
subordinates from being pros-
ecuted for crimes they commit-
ted under orders.

ixty-five years ago this
November at the International
Military Tribunal in Nuremberg,
Germany, 22 defendants stood in the
dock. They represented a cross-section
of Nazi diplomatic, eco-
nomic, political and military
leadership, and became the
first people in history to be
indicted for crimes against
humanity.
Preventing Genocide
A tribunal of judges from
The legacy of Nuremberg in
the victorious Allied coun-
preventing future atrocities
tries — the United States,
has been uneven. The United
Great Britain, France and the
Nations unanimously adopt-
Soviet Union — did not con-
ed the Convention on the
vict all of the defendants.
Prevention and Punishment of
While 12 were sentenced to
the Crime of Genocide on Dec.
death, three to life terms
9, 1948. However, the United
and four to prison terms of up to 20
States did not become a party to the
years, three were acquitted.
U.N. Convention until 1988. Not until
Additional trials were held in the fol-
the 1990s were the first international
lowing years. Collectively, all of the pro-
criminal tribunals since Nuremberg
ceedings are now commonly referred to
established in the wake of the failure
as the Nuremberg Trials.
to prevent genocide in the former
Well before the war ended, the Allies
Yugoslavia and in Rwanda.
had decided to prosecute Germans who
More recently, some encouraging
were responsible for crimes against
signs that genocide prevention efforts
civilian populations. They believed that
are taking hold have emerged. In 2002,
trials would hold an important place in
the Rome Statute of the International
history. They also hoped that establish-
Criminal Court established the first per-
ing a new legal precedent would extin-
manent judicial body dedicated to try-
guish the possibility of the world ever
ing those accused of genocide, crimes
facing these crimes again.
against humanity and war crimes. Three
Among its legacies, the military tri-
years later, the World Summit, a gather-
bunal at Nuremberg codified a new law
ing of leaders from U.N. member coun-
— crimes against humanity — to protect
tries, adopted language maintaining that
civilians, and it prosecuted Nazi war
member nations have a "responsibility

Greenberg's View

28

June 23 • 2011

to protect" civilians anywhere when
their own government cannot or will not
protect them from genocide, war crimes,
crimes against humanity or ethnic
cleansing.
Whether these trends continue will
depend on the will of policymakers and
the commitment of their constituents
to making prevention and punishment a
priority.

Historical Perspective

In addition to its legal legacy,
Nuremberg had an enormous impact
on our collective understanding of this
pivotal era in history. The U.S. chief
prosecutor, Robert Jackson, made a
crucial decision to base the prosecu-
tion on the voluminous documentary
evidence produced by the perpetrators
of genocide themselves rather than
eyewitness testimony, in part because
he feared the testimony of survivors
and other witnesses to Nazi crimes
could be dismissed as unreliable or
biased. Jackson's decision to rely on
documentary evidence presented a fuller
picture of Nazi atrocities than anyone
had previously imagined, and the trial
stands as an eternal testament to the
magnitude of the Holocaust.
Some 3,000 tons of documents,
photographs, film footage and artifacts
were presented at the first Nuremberg
Trial alone. The prosecutors' meticulous
work provided the foundation for initial
scholarship on the Holocaust and much
of what we know about that event today.
Jackson's concept of proving "incredible
events with credible evidence" probably
ended up having as much of an impact
educationally as legally.

One of the primary implementers of
the Nazi genocide who escaped trial
right after the war was Adolf Eichmann.
Captured by the Israelis in Argentina, he
was brought to trial in 1961. This time,
however, the trial would not take place in
occupied Germany but in Israel, home to
many Holocaust survivors. This would not
be victors' justice but victims' justice.
Nuremberg precedents invalidating
the doctrine of superior orders again
would be invoked. But in addition to
perpetrator documents, the survivors
of genocide testified, giving a human
face to the incomprehensible statistics,
massive amounts of official records and
countless piles of corpses.
While the primary focus of Nuremberg
was to establish the actions of the kill-
ers and the facts of the Holocaust, the
Eichmann trial put a spotlight on the
survivors and established the individual-

ity of its many victims. In the new era
of television, the trial was broadcast all
over the world, enabling people every-
where to hear searing personal testimo-
ny from one survivor after another.
Although the Eichmann trial did not
set legal precedents as the military
tribunal did at Nuremberg, it dramati-
cally shaped public understanding of
the Holocaust by bringing the personal
experiences of this history into living
rooms around the world.
The legacies of Nuremberg and the
Eichmann trial probably shape our world
more than we understand. The question
is: "Will they shape the future?"
Recognizing that true justice is never
possible in the face of such crimes, we
are nevertheless increasingly learn-
ing the value of holding perpetrators
accountable. But how do we work
toward a world where such trials are
not necessary? That question should
be the challenge we set for ourselves.
Responding to that challenge would be
the most meaningful tribute to those 6
million innocent men, women and chil-
dren for whom justice came too late.

Sara J. Bloomfield is director of the U.S.

Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington.

standing
guard

For
Israel And
Our Jewish
Community

The issue of refugees is often
central to discussions about
the Arab-Israeli conflict yet
such deliberations are far from
comprehensive. The flight of Jews
from Arab lands is strikingly absent,
some 800,000 fled between 1948 and
1960, while the agenda focuses solely
on a so-called Palestinian "Right of
Return." It would be an injustice for
the world to recognize the demands of
Palestinian refugees without recognizing
equal claims for compensation for former
Jewish refugees from Arab countries.
Write a letter to a local daily newspaper to
champion their cause. Contact information
is at: detroitjcrc.org/get_involved/index .
php?page=10187.

Prepared by Allan Gale, Jewish
Community Relations Council of
Metropolitan Detroit

0 June 23, 2011, Jewish Renaissance Media

