[On April
30th, BC published the first part of a three part essay that deals
with the torture practiced by the American government. Since then
I have been preoccupied with other matters; thus Part 2 was not
written until now. Click here to read Part 1.]
I recently read the 2009 book
by Neal Bascomb called Hunting
Eichmann: How a Band of Survivors and a Young Spy Agency Chased
Down the World's Most Notorious Nazi.
I learned a lot I had not previously known; the lack of knowledge
was due both to my own failure to read (or to remember if I did
read) and to the failure of the mass media to focus on or write
about matters it should focus on and write about (or broadcast).
So it was all news to me that
after World War II the Church participated in sneaking Nazis out
of Europe - getting them to Argentina, for example - via so-called
“ratlines.” The very worst of the worst, like Eichmann and Mengele,
escaped Europe this way. The idea that the Vatican was involved in this
is mind boggling, hardly believable. Yet it apparently happened.
It was also news to me that
there was a large, a huge, number of Germans in Argentina after the war, many apparently being
Nazis and many apparently being involved in hiding Nazis or helping
them to hide. From reading Bascomb’s work, it seems obvious, moreover,
that lots of the Germans in Argentina knew Eichmann was there and exactly
who he was. Eichmann even had weekly meetings for awhile with one
fellow, a Dutch writer who had been in the SS, to extensively relate
(and, where necessary, dredge up) his recollections for purposes
of an eventual biography and magazine series.
One sort of understood, previously,
that there were a lot of fascists in Peronista Argentina, but one
did not know that the Argentine government was aware of but denied
that Mengele was there.
Being
weaned on a diet of propaganda about the greatness and value of
Konrad Adenauer and his West German Government, one did not know
that former Nazi officials were one-third of his cabinet, a quarter
of the legislature (the Bundestag), much of the civil service, the
judiciary and the foreign ministry, numbered eight ambassadors,
included Hans Globke, who was Adenauer’s national security adviser,
a major figure in West German intelligence, and its chief liaison
with the CIA, but who had also been the writer of the Nazi interpretation
of law that had “stripped German Jews of their citizenship,” and
also included Theodore Oberlander, a former Waffen SS officer “who
had once demanded the extermination of the Slavic people” but (ironically)
was now Adenauer’s minister for refugees.
Perhaps it is little wonder
that there had been an outbreak in anti-Semitic acts in Germany
in the late 1950s and a party with pro-Nazi sympathies was gaining
ground then.
Naturally, Adenauer, and Germany had no interest in revelation of the Nazi
pasts of so many German officials. So, though one hadn’t known it
until now, the German government had no interest in catching Eichmann
or in seeing him brought to trial. For this might have caused all
the German Kurt Waldheims to be revealed (if you remember Waldheim).
Nor
did one know that the United States had absolutely no interest in catching
Eichmann. During the 1950s the U.S. was completely absorbed
in the Cold War and in stopping the Russians. Many former Nazis
who had worked for Eichmann were spying for us, the CIA had ties
to Globke, and though Bascomb doesn’t mention it, we were using
the Nazis’ rocket scientists, like Wernher von Braun, to build our
ICBMs. (One wonders what future historians will one day say about
this. Do you, by the way, remember Tom Lehrer’s lines: “I just send
them up. It’s not my business where they come down, says Wernher
von Braun.”) There was no American desire to catch a horrendous
Nazi war criminal whose arrest and trial might put a spotlight on
America’s ties to Nazis.
Nor, remarkably enough, did
Israel have much of an interest in trying to find
Eichmann. Its clandestine service, the now feared Mossad, was at
the time relatively new and tiny. It could not check out every rumor
which arose - there were many, mostly wrong - about the alleged
whereabouts of Eichmann, Mengele, Bormann and other Nazi criminals.
Israel faced
existential threats from Egypt
and other Arab countries; the state and the intelligence service
had to deal with those. The Holocaust was a subject too painful
to discuss for the quarter of the population who were survivors;
they rarely spoke of it and did not want to focus on it.
That a few people - Simon Wiesenthal,
German prosecutor Fritz Bauer (who was Jewish) and some others -
persevered in looking for Eichmann in the face of the disinterest
of various countries is a fairly remarkable story. But they did
persist, and eventually word reached Israel’s
Prime Minister, David Ben Gurion, of a solid tip that Eichmann was
in Argentina and of precisely where he was located.
Ben Gurion authorized the Mossad to capture him and bring him back
to Israel to stand trial.
Ben Gurion knew that it was
necessary not to allow the world, or the Israelis themselves, especially
the young, to forget what the Nazis had done, and to remind the
world to be on guard against future repetitions. “The world,” as
Bascomb puts it, “would be forced to remember the assembly line
of death that the Jews had faced - and it would be reminded that
such horrors must never be allowed to be repeated.”
When
the Israelis had Eichmann in captivity, he made some points (as
he had to the Dutch writer) that stick with one. As has become proverbial
for the Nazis, he insisted he had done the right thing because he
was simply following orders. He did not himself make the decisions
for death, he insisted, but was commanded to carry them out and
did as he was ordered. ‘“[A]s a recipient of orders, I had no choice
but to carry [them] out.”’ He had thereby served the cause of the
German people, and was proud that he had done his job well. As he
told his Dutch biographer with regard to Holland: “‘I sent my boxcars
to Amsterdam and most of the 140,000 Dutch Jews were directed for
the gas chambers at Bergen-Belsen, Sobibor and Auschwitz ... It
went beautifully!’”
Eichmann’s trial had various
effects, some perhaps foreseen by Ben Gurion. Let me quote from
Bascomb:
David Ben-Gurion had achieved
his ambition. The trial had a profound impact on Israel.
It unified the country in a way it had not been unified since the
1948 war. It educated the Israeli public, particularly the young,
on the true nature of the Holocaust. And, after sixteen years of
silence, it allowed survivors to openly share their experiences.
The trial also reinforced to Israelis that a sovereign state for
Jews was essential for their survival.
As for the rest of the world,
the Eichmann affair rooted the Holocaust in the collective cultural
consciousness. The
intensive coverage and the wave of Eichmann biographies and fantastic
accounts of his capture contributed to the process.
The Holocaust was finally anchored
in the world’s consciousness - never to be forgotten - by the outpouring
of survivor memoirs, scholarly works, plays, novels, documentaries,
paintings, museum exhibits, and films that followed in the wake
of the trial and that still continues today. This consciousness,
in Israel
and throughout the world, is the enduring legacy of the operation
to capture Adolf Eichmann.
Bauer and his fellow West German
prosecutors arrested a host of former Nazis implicated in the atrocities,
including several of Eichmann’s deputies. Right up to his death
in 1968, the Hesse attorney general cracked down on German fascist groups and campaigned
vigorously to unseat former Nazis from power, including Globke.
He continued to prosecute war crimes, most famously in the 1963
Auschwitz trials.
I would add my understanding
(which is correct, is it not?) that the Eichmann trial caused German
youth to begin asking their elders the now proverbial question “What
did you do during the war?” i.e., began the questioning,
of prior actions, which helped importantly in making Germany
the free, peaceful and democratic nation it is today.
In America,
the Eichmann trial seems to have had an enduring legacy, comprised
of vastly increased attention to the Holocaust by both Jews and
non-Jews. This is captured in the second of the two quotes above,
the one which begins “The Holocaust was finally anchored in the
world’s consciousness.” Perhaps it has not been sufficiently
anchored in the world’s consciousness, because we have since had
other mass slaughters in the former Yugoslavia, Darfur and Rwanda. And those who oppose
Israel for going too far seem not cognizant that the “race memory”
of destruction - for millennia, actually - is likely one of the
things driving Israel (at least in my (perhaps limited) opinion).
But notwithstanding that its memory was not sufficient to stop later
holocausts in Yugoslavia, Darfur and Rwanda, the Holocaust is lodged
deeply in much of the world’s memory now, as is the idea that the
Eichmannesque justification, the Naziesque justification, that one
was just following orders is not permissible, is no justification,
when people do evil.
Thus,
one of the lessons of Hunting
Eichmann is that much that was valuable occurred when something
was done which several nations had had no desire to see done - neither
Germany, nor the US, nor even Israel had had much of an interest
in catching and trying Eichmann and, in some instances, as Bascomb
discusses, had resisted or declined efforts to pursue him because
leaders or officials of the nations had thought pursuit, trial and
punishment of Eichmann would not fit national interests. History
has shown, I believe, that the leaders and officials who thought
this, who resisted or declined efforts to bring this evildoer to
justice, were wrong.
BlackCommentator.com
Columnist, Lawrence R. Velvel, JD, is the Dean of Massachusetts
School of Law. He is the author of Blogs From the Liberal Standpoint: 2004-2005 (Doukathsan
Press, 2006). Click here
to contact Dean Velvel, or you may, post your comment on his website,
VelvelOnNationalAffairs.com. |