Talk:The Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau, 1939–1945

Soviet Union was German ally in 1940
Soviet Union was German ally in 1940, when it killed more than 20 000 of Polish POWs (Interned miltary personel?) and civilians. It's possible that the crime was based on Soviet-German agreement. Somoene caimed in the article that Katyn was an Ally crime - it was a crime on Polish Allies. Xx236 15:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

The original German title and German name of the Bureau should probably be included in the article:"Die Wehrmacht-Untersuchungsstelle für Verletzungen des Völkerrechts"Xx236 15:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Reviews
Professor Dieter Fleck noted in Archiv des Völkerrechts, the leading German international law journal:

"This well-written book, which is based on thorough research of original sources, was first published in Germany in 1979. It triggered a broad discussion in the country and has seen several German editions. The present abridged and updated English version facilitates international participation in a debate on some historical aspects of a topic which is of ever increasing importance. It is timely and necessary to discuss the legal, sociological and psychological problems involved in the investigation of war crimes during and after armed conflicts ...Both this interesting publication and the open questions it leaves provide a strong argument in favour of international fact-finding, for which an adequate legal framework is now available under Article 90 of Protocol I (Additional to the Geneva Conventions).  Efforts towards establishing a permanent international tribunal on war crimes and crimes against humanity should benefit from the experience documented here."

Professor Otto Kimminich wrote in the German Yearbook of International Law:

"Jurisprudence and history work together as auxiliary disciplines in reciprocal relation to each other. For the historian, laws and judicial decisions are valuable sources of information which he explaoits with his own tools. The lawyer must know the history of the laws and regulations which he applies, a task which requires extensive knowledge. In fortunate cases a single author has full command of the methods of both disciplines. A book written by such an author is mor easily accessible for scholars of the different branches of knowledge as well as to the general public... The author of the book ... hold degrees in law and history and has worked successfully in both fields. His main concern is human rights (he has been working for more than 10 years with the UN Center for Human Rights in Geneva). He combines the experience of two continents which have been desperately in need of a greater understanding in the post-war world. An Americn, de Zayas has spent many years as a highly respected scholar in Europe. Dr. Walter Rabus, a Dutch expert in intrnational law who earned his degree in Paris, has helped him be performing research covering both continents ...The high praise which the German editions have received is even more appropirate for the English version, which constitutes the apex of concision and accuracy. "An academic job well done" was the verdict in the Netherlands International Law Review" (1990, p. 300) "This is an excellent book" Christopher Greenwood claimed in the Cambridge Law Journal (1990 p. 148). One cannot top such eulogies, but one can affirm them."

Professor R.P. Dhokalla, Secretary-General of the Indian Society of International Law, wrote in a review article for the Indian Journal of Intrnational Law, vol. 29, pp. 214-219

"The book ...is a pioneering study which describes in meticulous details the orgnization and work of a little known German Bureau ... which was purely an investigating agency of the Third Reich, similar to such Allied units as the UN War Crimes Commission or the parallel American, British, French or Russian agencies...Dr. de Zayas has made a significant contribution to the literature on war crimes...It is the responsiility of scholars and lawyers from the Third World in particular to focus attention, if not on the prevention of war itself, on preparing the ground for a better observance of the provisions of humanitarian law in armed conflicts. This scholarly contribution of Dr. de Zayas will undoubtedly be read with special interest as it has successfully attempted to fill a gap in the literature on war crimes bz providing not only informtive and reveling material, but also pursuing a convincing and objective analysis. The exposition is augmented by an excellent bibliography for the readers to undertake futher in-depth studies."

"A pioneer study that describes the organization and work of a little-known German Army branch that was responsible for investigating war crimes charges by the allies against the Germans agd by Germans against Allied nationals ... Every victim of inhumanity, regardless of race, or creed, should be entitled to the equal protection of the law. The stated primary purpose of this interesting and well-written work is to help minimize the violations of international law in any future armed conflicts. If that goal is to be achieved, it is not enough merely to know that the rules are often broken by all sides. Americans learned that lesson at My Lai. There mustr be continuous improvment in the codes in order to meet the changing modes of warfare. There must be inculcation and acceptance of humanitarian values, even in time of war. Most important, there must be a more certain, objective, and effective judicial machinery, national and international, to improve the enforcement of international law and the rules of war. The de Zayas book sheds light on a problem that has not yet been resolved." Ben Ferencz, former US Nuremberg Prosecutor, in the American Journal of International Law.

"In his important book, Dr. de Zayas writes of the bureau staff members' belief that 'the German armed forces were fighting honorably, in compliance with the Hague and Geneva Conventions'...he points out that during the war years many were living in a moral and intellectual vacuum, professionally confined to their daily lawyer's tasks. The members of the Gladisch Committee were far more conscious of the gulf between Nazi theories and practice on the one hand, and the demands of international humanitarian law on the other. Some were to die for their beliefs." Professor L.F.E. Goldie, in the American Journal of International Law, vol. 85, pp. 748f

"Dr. de Zayas' book is an excellent analysis of a topic that is not discussed as much as it should be. This topic is Allied war crimes committed against Germany prior and during World War II. While most historians document German atrocities during the World War, Dr. de Zayas painstakingly researched 226 volumes of records left by the Wehrmacht-Untesuchungsstelle (Geman Army Bureau for the Investigation of War Crimes) in order to "... evaluate these records, to examine the establishment, function, and methods of the German bureau of investigation, and try to draw the line between historical events and mere propaganda. In order to distinguish between propaganda and historical fact, Dr. de Zayas traced the stages of various documents in order to find contradictions or fabricated evidence. He fothermore interviewed more than 300 victims, witnesses and judges and verified the Bureau's records by cross decomentating with other German record groups and also the relevant American, British, French and Swiss files. Finally, as Dr. de Zayas notes, the bureau was influenced by its chief, Johannes goldsche -- who was not a member of the National Socialist Party and had no sympathy for Nazis or their methods ... Dr. de Zayas' book is excellent. It is easy to understand, and present sinformation in an objective manner. Any one interested in obtaining unbiased information about an obscure aspect of World War Ii should read this book." David Rubin in Comparative Juridical Review, Voilume 27, 1990, p. 140..

Professor G.C. Bekhoff, leyden University, noted in the Netherlands International Law Review:

"The facts were painstakingly researched by the author. Archives were consulted and cross-checked and survivors interviewed. It is an academic job well done, and a must for students of small islands of sanity in the ocean of madness called war. Professor Howard Levie states in his foreword: 'It can be said without fear of contradiction that this book opens a new dimension in the study of war crimes committed during World war II. It should generate much discussion and encourage other students of that period to further research, not only into the legal and historical, but also into the sociological and psychological aspects of this facet of that conflict'. I fully agree." Netherlands International Law Review, 1990, p. 300. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.3.224.20 (talk) 12:55, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Professor Riedlsperger in the German Studies Review:

"Dr. de Zayas first came upon the previously undiscovered 226 volumes of WUSt documents as a Fulbright fellow on leave from his studies in International Law at Harvard. After concluding his legal studies, de Zayas subsequently earned a Ph.D. in hisotry and the University of Göttingen, where he later became an associate. The Institute supported the research on which this study is based and arranged for the assistance of a Dutch international law specialist, Dr. Walter Rabus ... Mindful that the WUSt might have been manipulated by Goebbels's Propaganda Ministry, the authors were punctilious in their verification. They carefully examined the documents for internal consistency and continuity and then verified the reports and testimony, where possible, with judges, medical examiners and witnesses still alive. In addition, they compared WUSt documents with those of other German agencies in seven additional German archives, and with documents in British,.Dutch, Swiss, and American archives. In this exhaustive analysis, it becomes clear that the WUSt operated with scrupulous objectivity and therefore that its documents constitute a valuable new source for the study of the conduct of war. This carefully documented administrative history together with its excellent bibliography will therefore become an important introduction to this extensive archive. The Wehrmacht-Untersuchungsstelle is at once an interesting history of an internal agency of the Third Reich and an important archival and historiographical contribution to the study of the war." German Studies Review, 1980, pp. 150-151. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0149-7952(198102)4%3A1%3C150%3ADWUAUA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-8 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.3.199.54 (talk) 11:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Professor Andreas Hillgruber noted in the Historische Zeitschrift, Germany's leading historical journal, in volume 232 (1981):

"Die zugleich historische und völkerrechtliche Untesuchung eines amerikanischen und eines niederländischen Forschers hat die Tätigkeit einer Institution zum Gegenstand, deren Existenz nur Spezialisten bekannt war: der Wehrmacht-Untesuchungsstelle für Verletzungen des Völkerrechts im Oberkommando der Wehrmacht. Anknüpfend an die Arbeit der Militäruntersuchungsstelle für Verletzungen des Kriegsrechtes im Preussischen Kriegsministerium während des Ersten Weltkrieges, deren stellvertretenden Leiter, der Berliner Rechtsanwalt und Notar Johannes Goldsche, im Zweiten Weltkrieg der Leiter der OKW-Untersuchungsstelle war, stellte sie -- wie die akribische Untersuchung der beiden Gelehrten erweisen konnte -- nicht nur in personeller, sondern auch in sachlich-fachlicher Hinsicht eine ungewöhnliche Kontinuität dar, bildete sie doch eine art Insel der Rechtsstaatlichkeit innerhalb des Unrechtsstaates des "Dritten Reiches". Unter Auswertung der 226 Aktenbände der Untesuchungsstelle, abgesichert durch Heranziehung weiteren Quellenmaterials, durch Befragungen von Richtern, Zeugen und sonstigen Beteiligten, konnten die Vf die eigenen Zweifel, ob es sich nicht doch um eine Propaganda Institution des Regimes handelte, ausräumen und als Ergebenis konstatieren, dass von der Untersuchungsstelle mit richterlicher Objektivität bekannt gewordene Völkerrechtsverletzungen der Alliierten ermitelt wurden. Die Studie ist einerseits eine Behördengeschichte, die das Entstehen, die Arbeitsweise, die Kompetenzen und die Organisation der Untrsuchungsstelle darstellt, zum anderen konkrete Fälle behandelt, von denen die Vorgänge in Lemberg 1941, Feodosia 1941, Katyn 1943 wohl die bekanntesten sind. Jedoch sind auch Vorgänge auf westlichen Schauplätzen (in Norwegen 1940, Kreta 1941, Versenkung deutscher Lazarettsschiffe, so der "Tübingen" 1944) mit einbezogen. Hierbei konnte es sich jeweils nur um die Ermittlungen der Untesuchungsstelle und um den völkerrechtlichen Klärung im Sinne der Arbeit der Historiker handelt. Die Vf. - und der Göttinger Völkerrechtler Dietrich Rauschning, der dem Band ein Vorwort vorausschickte (in seinem Institut wurde der grösste Teil der Arbeit geleistet) -- heben deutlich hervor, dass der qualitative Unterschied zwischen den hier zur Sprache kommenden Verletzungen des Kriegsrechts durch die Alliiierten, so furchtbar sie z.T. waren, und em Genocid, das das "Dritte Reich" an Juden und Zigeunern verübte, nicht verwicht werden dürfte."

"Dies ist eine der wichtigsten Veröffentlichungen zur Zeitgeschichte" Die Welt

"Dieses Buch, das wissenschaftliches Neuland erschliesst, ist im Beweisgang sorgfältig abgestützt, es formuliert und wertet behutsam" Die Zeit. Full text of the review: http://www.zeit.de/1980/05/Die-Verbredien-der-anderen

"Nun, will das Buch nicht Verbrehcen gegen Verbrechen aufrechnen; es soll vielmehr zur Aufhellung eines dunklen Kapitels der jüngsten Geschichte Beitragen" ZDF-Drehscheibe

"Um nicht noch im nachhinein nationalsozialistischer Propaganda aufzusitzen, prüfte de Zayas 'die innere Folgerichtigkeit der Akten' und verglich die darin geschilderten Vorgänge mit einschlägigen Materialien in Bonner, Londoner, amerikanischen und schweizerischen Archiven. Er machte Hunderte von Zeugen ausfindig, darunter rund 150 ehemalige Heeres- Marine- und Luftwaffenrichter, die er nach dem Zustandekommen der Dokumente befragte ..." Der Spiegel

"de Zayas, der auch deutsche und ausländische Archive ausgewertet hat, ist bei seinen Untersuchungen sehr sorgfältig vorgegangen, in der Bewertung der Ermittlungsergebnisse der WUSt ist er objecktiv, eher vorsichtig und zurückhaltend. Die Arbeit enthält auch interessante völkerrechtliche Ausführungen Das lesenswerte Buch wird sicherlich viel Beachtung finden." Generalstaatsanwalt Erich Heimeshoff in Deutshe Richterzeitung.

"Mit der Kritik an der Kriegsfuehrung der Alliierten hat sich die vorliegegende solide Studie an die wenigen Publikationen angeschlossen, die einseitige militaerhistorische Perspektive abbauen wollen." Annotierte Bibliographie fuer die politische Bildung 2/80, Bundeszentrale fÜr Politische Bildung.

"Conduite avec une grande rigueur scientifique, cette recherche jette un éclairage nouveau et précieux sur certains aspects de la deuxième guerre mondiale. elle montre que la défense des causes les plus justes peux entrainer les pires abomintions et que ceux qui défendent le droit ne craignent pas toujours d'en violer les principes les plus élémentaires." Revue belge de droit intrnational ( vol. XXII, 1989, . 684)

On 8. March 1980 the Sueddeutsche Zeitung published a listing of the best books of the spring 1980 production, "Empfehlungsliste neuer BÜcher". On first place they listed Peter Scholl-Latour's Der Tod im Reisfeld, on second place Carlo Schmid: Erinnerungen, on third place: Die Wehrmacht Untersuchungsstelle.

The book manuscript in German was submitted to the competitition for the 1980 Prize of the Foundation Professor Guiseppe Ciardi of the International Society for the Law of Armed Conflict (Internationale Gesellschaft fuer Wehrrecht und Kriegsvoelkerrecht). At its Ankara Congress on 13 October 1979 the manuscript of Wehrmacht Untersuchujngsstelle came on second place. See commentary and listing in the Neue Zeitschrift fuer Wehrrecht 1980.

The above reviews illustrate the fact that de Zayas was ahead of his time in focusing on the necessity of critical judgment and the capacity to take distance from ourselves and test whether our own soldiers are observing the Hague and Geneva Conventions. Those who had argued "our boys do not commit war crimes" have learned differently since Vietnam, Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. Cruelty is an aberration that has accompanied mankind for thousands of years. Civilization should have taught us self-criticism and helped us to devise preventive mechanisms, so as to minimize the horrors and inhumanities of war.

The de Zayas book is the first (and still only) scholarly book on war crimes by non-Germans (primarily Soviets) during World War II
Still only? Xx236 14:56, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Historical context
With all due respect to German tragedies - the III Reich planned, started and implemented genocidal WWII in Eastern Europe. Don't start genocides if you don't like to be exterminated. Germany exterminated Soviet POWs, why should have the Soviets feed the German ones?Xx236 15:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

On the 23. march 1939 Poland activated a part of his army.(official 300.000) ( FM Beck) On the 25. march 1939 the british ambassador Kennard in Warschau was writing home.( Doc on British Foreign Policy 1919-1939 Vol IV Doc 523) The mobilisation of the Polish army went much further, Influancal persons  tell 750.000 as number..... it comes to mind that  M.Beck wants to start the discussion about Danzig...  I have the same idea as my fellow collegues that the Polish goverment wants to start a fight witch Germany. Johann

Cannot believe what I read sometime on wiki ... or have I got it wrong? You seriously propose that the Germans can expect to be bashed (or exterminated) simply because the reich and palnned and started a genocidal war?

As to Katyn .... it was not the only Soviet crime against Poles. The first was, of course, the 1939 partition of Poland between Hitler and Stalin, both of whom committed the crime of aggression. Nor was Katyn the only mass grave discovered by the Wehrmacht in Eastern Poland, Ukraine and Bielorussia. As the documents of the Wehrmacht Untersuchungsstelle show, the German military judges conducted forensic investigations of many exhumed bodies and took the deposition of witnesses and survivors. The Germans, of course, left their own trail of mass graves, including Jews murdered by the Einsatzgruppen. At the Nuremberg trials the Germans were accused of the crime at Katyn, but in 1990 Gorbatchov formally apologized to Poland for the NKWD crime in 1940. There was no collusion between Hitler and Stalin on Katyn...not that has been documented or I know of so lets not try to rewrite history at least on this count.

the above text written by Oldrich. Xx236 07:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The Katyn massacre rewrites history, you may present your point of view there.

Germans expected to be bashed~or exterminated, read German press 1944/1945. I meant however mostly the mistreatment of the POWs - it was a German idea, only much later implemented by the Soviets. POW rights are bilateral, so Don't start genocides if you don't like to be exterminated. Xx236 07:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry but its pure nonsence because it was just the opposit way around. The Sovjets did not make POW. In the beginning of the war against the USSR all german soldiers where killed, while the Germans made POW even a lot of them changed the sides ( Wlassov ) army, because the Soviets had even the dendency to kill their own soldiers when they got free. So in reaction on the soviet killing of German Soldiers the german army started to deal with Soviet Soldiers not so nice, but as much as 500.000 of the voluntarely changed sides.

By the way the plans for expelling the Germans dated back in Poland and in Chech organisations till the 19 th century and not from radical groups from the main political leaders. As was the Soviet animosity against the Germans allready after the I WW a lot of civilian Germans in the Baltic got killed or where but in Camps( Riga)Because of this private german forces started a counter offensive after the end of the I WW and fried Latvia.

Johann

Yes, Johann, Poles are guilty of everything. Thank you for your holistic explanation of WWII. We have also caused AIDS. BTW - Adolf Hitler was a Polish woman.Xx236 13:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Our friend Xx236 is apparently reacting to the subject matter and may not have read Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau as yet. Chapters 16, 17 and 18 demonstrate on the basis of reliable evidence (forensic investigations, witness testimony sworn before military judges) that the killing of German POWs by the Red Army was systematic and that it started already in June 1941 -- i.e. that it was not a reaction to German killings of Soviet POWs. This is one of the most interesting revelations of the book, as has been duly noted by several scholarly reviewers. Of course, many Soviet POWs were murdered by the Germans, but the Wehrmacht did not have a standing order or practice. In fact, they did take millions of Soviet POWs and kept them in huge camps. The tragedy of the large scale death of Soviet POWs occurred much later in he war, when the German supply lines were systematically broken by the partisans. The documents in the archives, war diaries, intelligence evaluations etc. show that the Wehrmacht leaderhip was taken aback by the ferocity of the war since 21 June 1941 and were surprised by the high number of murdered German POWs and mutilated bodies discovered on the field. Nothing like this had happened in the Western front -- or in Poland, where some German POWs were also murdered, but not systematically. What Xx236 writes "only much later implemented by the Soviets" is thus anachronistic. Jeff

I have also a news for you our friend Jeff - the Germans came to the SU to kill many POWs and not only POWs. If you want to whitewash the Wehrmacht you have thousands of German pages, don't do it here.Xx236 12:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Let's give "our friend" Jeff the benefit of the doubt, and assume that he is -totally- unaware of the Commissar Order, by which the German military attacked the USSR on June 22nd (NOT 21st, as Jeff states), 1941 with the intention of killing PoWs, even before the first shot was fired. Let's also note that German troops had been murdering PoWs long before 1941, notably, at Wormhout and Le Paradis in 1940. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.242.177.149 (talk) 07:47, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

The Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau certainly belongs in the list of the 10 or 20 most important books on World War II. It has vast implications that historians, lawyers, sociologists will have to come to grips with. As one reviewer noted in the 1980s, the judicial investigations of the Wehrmacht Untersuchungsstelle are of considerable historical and legal significance. In itself, the discovery of these records by Dr. de Zayas qualifies as one of the most important "finds" of World War Ii records after the Nurembert Trials. Indeed, the records of the Untersuchungsstelle would have been of great relevance at the Nuremberg Trials, but they were classified documents at the National Archives in Washington at the time. The research conducted by the Göttinger team is munumental -- not only going through 7 meters of records, but consulting the relevant achival material in the US, Great Britain, Germany and Switzerland. De Zayas, who also reads Russian, was able to evaluate captured Soviet records found in the files of the Wehrmacht Untersuchungsstelle and Fremde Heere Ost, including flyers of Ilya Ehrenburg (including the infamous "Ubei" flyer, which de Zayas publishes in facsimile, providing a partial translation). What is mind-boggling is the ability of the team to ferret out some 200 witnesses whose names appear in the records and some 100 former infrantry- navy- and airforce judges who had carried out the investigations. They were interviewed and asked about the methodology of the initial investigations, about the possibility of error in their evaluations, about what they may have subsequently learned about the events. Some judges and witnesses were able to provide additional documentation, including photos, as indicated in the thousand or so footnotes in the book. Today this research would not be possible, because most of the judges and witnesses are dead -- or senile. In a very real sense, the Göttinger team saved the record group from oblivion and succeeded in confirming the realiability of the files. These records are thus not fabrications of the Goebbels propaganda ministry. Other researchers will yet have to tackle the many questions raised in this unique and troubling book. Dr. Dr. Johannes van Aggelen.

The Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau certainly belongs in the list of the 10 or 20 most important books on World War II. - it's your POW, it's not the place for advertizing.

The logic of the Wikipedia is that you should rather read Ilya Ehrenburg and discuss there. Xx236 14:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

LIVE INTERVIEW OF ALFRED DE ZAYAS ON CNN WORLD NEWS BY LOU WATERS ON 16 APRIL 1990 AT 17:15 (recorded at New York CNN Studios)

WATERS: "On 13 April 1990 Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbatchov formally apologized to the Polish nation, admitting Soviet responsibility for the NKVD massacre of Polish POWs at Katyn, near Smolensk, in 1940. Dr. Alfred de Zayas, an American historian, points out that Katyn represents only the tip of the iceberg, that the bulk of Soviet crimes are yet to be investigated -- the killings and deportations of the Baltic and Polish intelligentsia, the GULAGs the eenforced starvation, the Stalinist purges..."

After discussing Katyn, Waters asks de Zayas about his new book on the Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau and its methodology. The book appears on the screen.

Waters: "Should the Soviet admission that it was Stalin's secret police, the NKVD, that murdered 15,000 Polish prisoners of war at Katyn and elsewhere in the Sviet Union now be followed by further admissions and investigations concerning other massacres of the Stalinist period?"

Zayas: "The Soviet Union is full of mass graves wehre the NkVD disposed of millions of Soviet citizens -- Ukrainians, Belorussians, Tatars, Lithuanians, Estonians, Latvians, Poles -- perceived to be political or religious opponents of the regime. During the Second World War the invading German Army discovered many mass graves, but no one believe them. Shortly before retreating from the Katyn area, the Germans also discovered pits containing an estimated 50,000 civilians, indicating that the Katyn forest had been a frequently used execution ground for the NKVD. At Vinnitsa the bodies of 10,000 civilians killed in 1938 had been found, at Lviv the victims of Stalin's terror were estimated at 12,000. Other massacres occurred at Dubno, Luck, Sarni, Brzerznaz, Tarnopol, Dorpat, etc."

Waters: de Zayas backs up his charges with abundant documentation and interview testimony in his new book, the Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau, published by the University of Nebraska Press in Lincoln, Nebraska.

Zayas: "The book is the result of the evaluation of 226 volumes of previously classified records of the Legal Division of the Wehrmacht, and further research into related military and diplomatic records in German, British, American and Swiss archives."

Book appears again on the screen

INTRODUCTION TO FILM "KRIESVERBRECHEN IM WESTEN" (WAR CRIMES ON THE WESTERN FRONT" NACH DEN AKTEN DER WEHRMACHT-UNTERSUCHUNGSSTELLE FÜR VERLETZUNGEN DES VÖLKERRECHTS

BROADCAST ON ARD/WDR GERMAN CHANNEL 1 ON 18 MARCH 1983 AT 9 P.M.

Film shows Alfred de Zayas standing before the building of the German Military Archives:

"Behind me you see the Federal Military Archives at Freibung in West Germany. Thousands of hitherto untouched files are stored here awaiting discovery by eager researchers. Among these files are many war diaries and the records of the Legal Division of the Wehrmacht, including the 226 volumes of the German Army Bureau for War Crimes, the so-called Wehrmacht-Untersuchungsstelle für Verletzungen des Völkerrechts.

226 big volumes, each 100 to 500 pages. American troops captured these files in April 1945 at Torgau on the River Elbe and sent them to Washington, where they were classified and placed out of reach. These files contain primarily German investigations of reported instances of Allied war crimes.It should be noted that this record group comprises but a fraction of the original documentation and internal files of the Bureau, which was set up on 4 September 1939 and functioned through April 1945.

One question immediately arises: Isn't this pile of documents nothing more than Goebbels' propaganda material ? Indeed, my Dutch colleague Dr. Walter Rabus and myself approached our assignment with considerable skepsis, but had to conclude that this bureau of investigation performed its tasks responsibly and even attempted to investigate reports of German war crimes. Unfortunately, all these latter investigations (with the exception of some incomplete records relating to the killing of British POWs in Northafrica contained in a single WUSt file) were lost or destroyed, or have not been declassified.

The authenticity of the existing records was further put to test by carefully reviewing the continuity and coherence of each investigation and by comparing records with outside evidence, including Americna, British, French and Swiss files. Finally, the witness testimony could be confirmed in some 300 cases by locating the former witnesses and judges and confronting them with these wartime depositions.

STATEMENT BY ALFRED DE ZAYAS, TO INTRODUCE THE SECOND PART OF THE DOCUMENTARY, BROADCAST ON 21 MARCH 1983 AT 9 P.M. DE ZAYAS IS SITTING INSIDE THE ARCHIVE BUILDING AND IS PAGING THROUGH A VOLUME OF THE WEHRMACHT RECORDS

After World War II historical research into war crimes has focused largely on the investigation of Nazi crimes. One of the reasons for this limitation has been the relative lack of concrete evidence of violations of the laws and customs of war by the Allies during that conflict.

This was the case until the files of the German Army Bureau on War Crimes were declassified and the originals returned by the United States Government to the Federal Republic of Germany. This large record group has been open to scholars since 1975.

The study of these files shows that in wartime there is always a danger of excesses, of violations of the provisions of the Hague and Geneva Conventions and that this problem affected every party to the conflict to a greater or lesser degree.

It is the responsibility of scholars to focus attention on this difficult and unfelicitous chapter of contemporary history, in order to determine in which situations which war crimes were committed and thereby help prepare the gorund for a better observation of the provisions of humanitarian law in armed conflict.

Yet the higher concern must remain the eradication of the cause of these violations -- that is, the prevention of war itself."

The films had a huge audience in Germany and received mostly positive reviews -- "Echo überwiegend positiv. Nur wenig Auslands-Kritik zur Kriegsverbrehcen Dokumentation". Factual commentary in the BBC, Guardian, New York Times, Los Angeles Times. Short excerpts were broadcast in the Today Show on 23 March 1983.

On 18 March 1983 the newspaper Westfalen Blatt reported: "WDR-Redakteur Jürgen Rühle, der seinerzeit auch für die Austrahlung von 'Holocaust' verantwortlich war, begründete die neue Dokumentationsendung mit der Verpflichtung des Historikers, geschichtliche Tatsachen - gleich unter welcher Verantwortlichkeit geschehen - nicht zu unterdrucken."

In 2005 the two-part documentary was reissued in DVD format, Polar Films, ISBN 3-937163-85-9)

See also the article in the Historical Journal (1992) Vol. XXXV pp. 383-400 "The Wehrmacht Bureau on War Crimes". http://www.jstor.org/view/0018246x/di013476/01p0343y/0


 * This book raises many issues that await further research by American, British, French, German, Polish, Russian historians. It is surprising that 28 years after the publication of the first German edition, no dissertation has been written on the Wehrmacht-Untersuchungsstelle nor on the work of its director, the old Berlin judge Johannes Goldsche.  Anyone who has read the hundreds of footnotes in The Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau knows that de Zayas identified important areas of research that require further investigation, including the role of SS Judge Georg Konrad Morgen, whose testimony at the Nuremberg Trials remains of great relevance to understand the atmosphere of terror, denunciation and intimidation prevalent among German civil servants, soldiers and officers during WWII.  It seems that the taboo that 1945-1975 prevented other historians from investigating these issues continues in place, notwithstanding the positive academic reception of the book and the ground-breaking work by de Zayas.  Dr. JvA 193.239.220.249 13:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Although the German Historischer Zeitschrift, the German Yearbook of International Law and the Archiv des Völkerrechts reviewed this book quite enthusiastically and noted its significance for future research, German historians and international lawyers did not rush into this terra incognita. As Dr. JvA notes, there are many surprises hidden in the footnotes of this book, and 62 years after the war it is time to conduct scholarly research into these issues. The privately funded Reemtsma Exhibit on "Verbrechen der Wehrmacht" (crimes by the Wehrmacht) 1996-99 did not at all mention the existence of the German War Crimes Bureau or its 226 extant files.  It was a Polish historian, Bogdan Musial, who in an article in the Viertelsjahreshefte für Zeitgeschichte discovered that a photograph used by the Reemstma Exhibit was wrongly labeled in the exhibit, and that the same photo published by de Zayas in "Die Wehrmacht Untersuchungsstelle" did correctly identify the victims as nationalist Ukrainians killed by the NKVD in Lemberg and surrounding villages -- and not by the Germans.  This book thus contributed to the debate on crimes by the Germans and crimes by the NKVD.  The consequence of the Musial article was that the Reemtsma exhibit was closed and generally cleaned up of many other photos that were wrongly labeled. It reopened without the picture, but no document from the files of the Wehrmacht-Untersuchungsstelle was reproduced or commented. A future exhibit could perhaps take this up.  It would also have been interesting if the records of the Wehrmacht Untesuchungsstelle had been available to the prosecution and defence teams at Nuremberg.  Unfortunately, these important files were classified as captured enemy records and kept in the Washington Army Archives -- out of reach by lawyers and researchers for 30 years.  De Zayas was the first researcher to see them after declassification and return to the Bundesarchiv in Freiburg i.Br.  The book was a sensation when it came out, as noted in a 5-page interview with de Zayas in DER SPIEGEL in January 1980.  Although the book has had 7 editions and every edition has been enriched by the addition of new research by de Zayas, there has been no follow-up by the international guilds of historians.  This book certainly would have justified a "Historikerstreit" as took place in Germany 1986-87 over Ernst Nolte's "Der Europäische Bürgerkrieg".  Johanna Müller85.3.222.33 13:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

The book is favourably footnoted in James J. Weingartner, "Americans, Germans, and War Crimes: Converging Narratives from "the Good War"" in The Journal of American History Vol. 94 No. 4 March 2008, pps. 1164-1183.84.203.178.18 (talk) 23:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Reading this book is like getting a very cold shower -- the Germans in the role of victims! For us Dutch peoples it is not at all what we're used to. And yet, whoever has read Erich Maria Remarques "All Quiet on the Western Front" knows that Germans can be victims too -- and what makes the de Zayas book so important is that it reminds us that we are all capable to commit crimes, that the ultimate crime is indeed the crime against peace (Robert Jackson at Nuremberg). de Zayas manages to give an enormous amount of information without pathos and without polemic. The book should be taught in high schools and universities. 82.217.225.209 (talk) 06:18, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


 * This book is a stupendous piece of research. Why haven't other historians continued research in this field?  Why hasn't the history channel taken this up?  The book has wide implications. It is not just the fact that Allied soldiers also committed war crimes -- we know this from Vietnam and Irak too. What is interesting is that here were a bunch of German military judges who evidently thought they were "the good guys" and that the Allies were violating the Hague and Geneva Conventions right and left. This raises interesting historical, psychological and sociological issues. 210.82.92.237 (talk) 15:44, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Xx236 added a "sources" warning. Why? This article makes reference to the ICRC book of Marco Sassoli/A.Bouvier "How does Law Protect in War" (2nd edition 2006), which reproduces part of "the Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau".  The article also mentions the reviews in SPIEGEL, ZEIT,Cambridge Law Journal etc. These are all legitimate sources.  Maybe the administrators could glean out of the discussion page some additional sources, e.g. Weingartner.193.239.220.249 (talk) 12:40, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Who is the "administrators" to edit the article? As far as I understand we should edit it, there are no "administrators" to do tedious tasks. I'm asking - why have you removed my "Sources" if the article is so poorly referenced? Talk page isn't the article, it's a discussion.Xx236 (talk) 06:40, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

This is an English Wikipedia
The article contains a text in German. Please translate it into English or remove it. Xx236 (talk) 12:56, 29 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry Xx236. A translation, unless it is an official translation, risks being challenged as inaccurate. It is always better to bring the original in German. Besides, the topic of this article is a German bureau and all the records are in German. Here, for instance, is an excerpt from the excellent review in Der SPIEGEL, in the original:  "Um nicht noch im nachhinein nationalsozialistische Propaganda aufzusitzen, prüfte de Zayas 'die innere Folgerichtigkeit der Akten' und verglich die darin geschilderten Vorgänge mit einschlägigen Materialien in Bonner, Londoner, amerikanischen und schweizerischen Archiven. Er machte Hunderte von Zeugen ausfindig, darunter rund 150 ehemalige Herres- Marine- und Luftwaffenrichter, die er nach dem Zustandekommen der Dokumente befragte...

Ob es sich mal um Kopflosigkeit, mal um Tucke haldelte -- was immer die Wehrmacht-Untersuchungsstelle prüfte und de Zayas in deren Akten fand, erreichte, 'bei aller Grausamkeit im Einzelfall', doch nirgends 'die Ebene des organisierten Völkermords', wie Professor Dietrich Rauschning, Direktor des Göttinger Universitäts Instituts für Völkerrecht, an dem de Zayas arbeitete, in einem Vorwort festhielt: 'Ein Vergleich mit dieser Dimension verbietet sich.' Auch de Zayas will seine Veröffentlichung keineswegs als 'Anrechnung gegen Holocaust' verstanden wissen und wendet sich vorsorglich gegen 'Beifall von der falschen Seite'. Aber: 'Wenn das nun mal alles so stimmt, muss man auch darüber reden können." Der Spiegel Nr. 4/1980, S. 77-81 http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-14318865.html .193.239.220.249 (talk) 07:46, 9 July 2010 (UTC) Times are changing and the attitude towards the victims of "ethnic cleansing" in Europe, too. Thanks to Prof. de Zayas.--92.229.14.132 (talk) 20:31, 2 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with 193. And I just discovered in the de Zayas site a relevant document that has not been mentioned in this discussion page, and, as far as I know, has never been published. It is the closing report on the project to the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Germany's most distinguished scholarly foundation, which primarily funds major academic projects) on the Project "Wehrmacht Untersuchungsstelle", which de Zayas directed 1975-79. The report is dated September 1979 and includes a wealth of information unavailable elsewhere. http://www.alfreddezayas.com/Law_history/dfgschlussbericht 85.0.19.214 (talk) 16:28, 14 July 2010 (UTC)


 * What are the implications of this book? Many.  First, that we are all capable of committing crimes, that war crimes and genocide are not the exclusive domain of the Nazis; second, that notwithstanding the fact that the Nazis did commit horrendous crimes, it remains necessary and legitimate to test Allied compliance with the Hague and Geneva Conventions; third, that the German bureau on war crimes was not a propaganda organ, but a judicial investigative body, not unlike parallel institutions in the Allied countries, such as the US and British War Crimes Commissions; fourth, that consistent with the principle audiatur et altera pars, the German allegations should be heard and not dismissed out of hand; fifth, that the German judges were serious professionals, that the Bureau was in fact an island of law in a lawless ocean; seven, that the Soviet from of total war did not develop in the course of the war, but was there from 21 June 1941, that the shooting of German POWs following interrogation was widespread; eighth, that there has been almost total impunity for Allied soldiers -- whether Soviet, Polish, Yugoslav, French, British or American; ninth, that historians have hitherto neglected to study alliied war crimes and contented themselves with beating a dead horse.  Much of Second World War history is deadly boring -- always more of the same.  This book offers vast opportunities for further research and doctoral dissertations, e.g. over the jurisprudence of the German military courts to protect the civilian population of occupied territories (see chapter 4 of the Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau); about the war crimes trials conducted by the Germans against Polish, French, Soviet and Yugoslav soldiers (see chapter 9); about the function of the protecting power and diplomatic protest notes (chapter 8);  about the use of forensic doctors to investigate cases of torture and mutilation (chapter 6); about Wehrmacht conceptions of post-war international law (chapter 12).  As Oxford Professor Norman Stone wrote in the London Times, this is indeed "an important book".  It is amazing that British, American and Canadian universities have not followed-up on the pioneering research of de Zayas.  It would help us develop a more balanced view of the Second World War -- and of war in general.  But most of our journalists and historians seem to prefer to deal with caricatures and stereotypes.  This is a challenging and extremely well researched book. Valorum (talk) 16:39, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree with both IPs 193 and 85 -- maybe the article should further develop the implications of the existence of such a bureau in the German Army. Whoever has read the book knows that the thrust of the research was to determine whether the German allegations concerning Allied War Crimes were credible or merely more propaganda from Goebbels' kitchen. The book convincingly shows that the German investigations were not propaganda. They were used primarily for lodging official diplomatic protests against e.g. the United States and Great Britain in connection with the alleged shooting of prisoners of war, the bombardment of Red Cross hospitals and trains, the sinking of the hospital ship "Tübingen", the shooting at German shipwrecked in Narvik and in the Mediterranean. What is interesting is that the Brits and the Americans did not dismiss these allegations out of hand -- but took them quite seriously and carried out investigations, and, as in the case of the sinking of the Tübingen, excused themselves. Even Eisenhower excused himself because of the accidental death by asphyxiation of some 130 German POWs who were being transported in sealed wagons in France in 1944. What comes out of the investigations of the German Bureau is that the German judges had a sense for the necessity and validity of the Hague and Geneva Conventions and that they were subjectively convinced that the Brits and the Americans (and the Soviets) were breaking many provisions of these Conventions. The book also illustrates the importance of systematic collection and analysis of reports and the taking of sworn depositions from witnesses. Probably this collected evidence would have been used in war crimes trials against the Allies, if the Germans had won the war. An amazing prospect, but there it is, and it raises a number of important sociological, juridical, historical and ethical questions. Yet another question is why historians have not yet followed the example of de Zayas and addressed the complexities and nuances of the years 1939-45. Reading world world II history has more and more the feeling of "déjà vu" -- historians just parrot each other. Here de Zayas proves to be a pioneer, and does so in a quiet, non polemical way. Dr. Raymond Lohne, Columbia College Chicago 67.184.223.103 (talk) 14:45, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

copyedit
I am copyediting the article to remove an excessive use of long quotations, excessive use of his name, repeated non-specific praise from the book-reviews, and excessive links to other notable people and institutions. I'm also going to work on decreasing the duplication with other related articles. Wikipedia is not promotional; the purpose of our articles is to describe the subjects. This includes describing their significance, but we show it, not say it.

In my several years of experience here as an administrator, I have seen many articles on controversial subjects get attacked and sometimes emasculated or even deleted  because they adopt a tone of promotion or public relations handout or publisher's blurb. The protection against such attack is to write a modest and straightforward article, perhaps even understated a little. I strongly urge people, especially anyone with a COI as a strong supporter of de Zayas work, to not reinsert the material I remove. I specialize a little in articles on academic subjects and academic books, and I know how to get them to fit our sometimes idiosyncratic standards.

And I think I need to point out that the talk page is for discussing the article, not the subject.  DGG ( talk ) 05:09, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Dear DGG. That makes a lot of sense.  I just added 3 critical reviews from the Polish press in 1979-80.  You are probably right that de Zayas has kind of a "fan club" -- but this may be because no one else seems to want to tackle these difficult issues seriously, and there is a perceived need to approach contemporary history with an open mind, prepared to be shocked or upset.  De Zayas has a web site where he has uploaded many reviews of his books, including his recent human rights publications. I found this review of Wehrmacht by a Colonel Fisher in ARMY, May 1991, quite revealing: "If ever a book graphically described the horrors associated with war, this is it... The author has thoroughly and skillfully researched these documents to present a moving and disturbing record of investigations by a small group of German military lawyers remakably untainted by membership in the Nazi Party. The author quotes one member of the Bureau as saying: 'During my entire career as an army judge until the end of the war...I was never subjected to any influence fromt he party, nor for that matter from the commanders...' The author, in his efforts to establish the bureau's credibility, learned that many opponents of National Socialism had come together in the bureau. Moreover, nothing in the files gave a priori reason to doubt the integrity of the bureau members. The author found no comments in the bureau's internal correspondence that would indicate adherence to Nazi ideology, no anti-Semitic observations and no jaded remarks. What became obvious from the author's study of the unfortunately incomplete internal correspondence is that the bureau members had a subjective conviction that the Allies, mostly the Soviets, were grossly violating international law in their crimes against German soldiers.

For American and British readers, this allegation may come as quite a shock, turning the tables on them and forcing them to see the other side. Many readers, however, might ask how the Germans could fault Allied behavior when at the same time Einsatzgruppen had been shooting thousands upon thousands of Jews, and in Auschwitz, Treblinka, Sobibor, Lublin-Majdanek and Chelmo, additional millions were being gassed. The author's ultimate answer is that they did not know. Hitler's Order No. 1 seems to have played an important role in effectively limiting the number of people who knew about the Holocaust. This order, which a bureau member stated hung in every office and was taken very seriously, assured that only a very few knew what was happening. Historians must yet decide what to believe about the Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau, about the reliability of its records and about the reasons it never investigated the greatest crime against humanity in this century. Only the discovery of additional files can shed light on the uncertainties that prevail concerning this aspect of the bureau's work." Col. Ernest F. Fischer Jr., Ph.D., USA retired, in ARMY, May 1991, p. 69." Animus63 (talk) 20:44, 15 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Zayas has just published a kind of follow-up to "Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau". The book came out with a Munich publisher called Olzog, and thus far it is only in German:  "Voelkermord als Staatsgeheimnis" or genocide as state secret.  Zayas uses the records of the Wehrmacht Bureau and his interviews with German judges as well as other archives to illustrate how the Nazis tried to keep awareness of the Holocaust to a minimum, how they has a whole machinery to dissimulate the killings, destroy the traces, deny rumours etc. In the process he uncovers a lot of unknown or little known Nazi crimes and addresses the issue of Wehrmacht opposition to Hitler and the attempts on Hitler's life. Prof. Arnulf Baring, Berlin, gave it a pretty good review in the Tagesspiegel of 11 September, http://www.tagesspiegel.de/kultur/staatsgeheimnis/4598806.html.66.104.252.226 (talk) 15:46, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * CORRECTED THE ISBN NUMBER OF THE 7TH GERMAN EDITION -- IT IS NOT ISBN 3-8004-1015-6, BUT ISBN 3-8004-1051-6. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Animus63 (talk • contribs) 17:07, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Kerr
I propose removing the passage that references Kerr -- it's incited, and also sounds promotional to a certain extent. It's also possibly non-notable to be included in the article. Please let me know of any feedback. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:45, 12 March 2016 (UTC)