WORLD WAR
TWO WAR CRIMES BY AMERICAN FORCES
-
Canicattì massacre: killing of Italian civilians by Lieutenant Colonel McCaffrey. A confidential inquiry was made, but McCaffrey was never charged with an offence relating to the incident. He died in 1954. This incident remained virtually unknown until Joseph S. Salemi of New York University, whose father witnessed it, publicized it.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Giovanni Bartolone, Le altre stragi: Le stragi alleate e tedesche nella Sicilia del 1943–1944
George Duncan, Massacres and Atrocities of World War II in the Axis Countries
-
The Dachau massacre: killing of German prisoners of war and surrendering SS soldiers at the Dachau concentration camp.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Albert Panebianco (ed). Dachau its liberation 57th Infantry Association, Felix L. Sparks, Secretary 15 June 1989
-
In the Biscari massacre, which consist of two instances of mass murders, U.S. troops of the 45th Infantry Division killed roughly 75 prisoners of war, mostly Italian.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Weingartner, James (November 1989). "Massacre at Biscari: Patton and An American War Crime". The Historian LII (1): 24–39.
-
Operation Teardrop: Eight of the surviving, captured crewmen from the sunk German submarine U-546 are tortured by US military personnel. Historian Philip K. Lundeberg has written that the beating and torture of U-546's survivors was a singular atrocity motivated by the interrogators' need to quickly get information on what the US believed were potential missile attacks on the continental US by German submarines.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Lundeberg, Philip K. (1994). "Operation Teardrop Revisited". In Runyan, Timothy J. and Copes, Jan M. To Die Gallantly : The Battle of the Atlantic. Boulder: Westview Press. ISBN 0813388155., pp. 221–226; Blair, Clay (1998). Hitler's U-Boat War. The Hunted, 1942–1945 (Modern Library ed.). New York: Random House. ISBN 0679640339., p. 687.
EISENHOWER MURDERS ONE MILLION GERMAN WAR
PRISONERS
VIA EXPOSURE TO WINTER RAINS, STARVATION, AND DISEASE
VIA EXPOSURE TO WINTER RAINS, STARVATION, AND DISEASE
AMERICAN CAMPS - 2.5 MILLION GERMAN PRISONERS
EXPOSED
NO CLOTHING, BEDDING, HOUSING & 300 CALORIES RATION
Other Losses is a 1989 book by Canadian
writer
James Bacque, in which Bacque alleges that U.S. General
Dwight Eisenhower intentionally caused the deaths by
starvation or exposure of around a million
German
prisoners of war held in Western
internment camps briefly after the
Second World War. Other Losses charges that
hundreds of thousands of German prisoners that had fled the
Eastern front were designated as "Disarmed
Enemy Forces" in order to avoid recognition under the
third
Geneva Convention, for the purpose of carrying out their
deaths through disease or slow starvation. Other Losses
cites documents in the
U.S. National Archives and interviews with people who
stated they witnessed the events. The book claims that there
was a "method of genocide" in the banning of
Red Cross inspectors, the returning of food aid, the
policy regarding shelter building, and soldier ration
policy.NO CLOTHING, BEDDING, HOUSING & 300 CALORIES RATION
U.S. Army military historian Colonel Ernest F. Fisher, who wrote the book's foreword, argues that the claims are accurate.
Other Losses
The title of Other Losses derives from a column of figures in weekly U.S. Army reports that Bacque states actually reflects a body count of German prisoners that died of slow starvation or diseases. The book states that Colonel Philip Lauben, chief of German Affairs Branch at SHAEF (Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force), confirmed that "other losses" meant deaths and escapes, with escapes being a minor part.[1] Bacque dismisses claims from his opponents that "other losses" meant transfers or discharges, as these are accounted for in other columns in the same tables. Furthermore, there is no separate column in which deaths were recorded.The book refers to the Army Chief Historians report that was published in 1947; in the 20 pages dealing with the capture, transfer and discharge of prisoners, the report makes no mention of releasing prisoners without formal discharge. Furthermore, Bacque cites Army orders from Eisenhower himself (Disbandment Directive No. 1) stating that every prisoner leaving captivity had to have discharge papers.[2]
Disarmed Enemy Forces designation
Other Losses states that Eisenhower sought to sidestep the requirements of the Geneva Convention through the designation of these prisoners as Disarmed Enemy Forces (DEF), specifically stating that "in March, as Germany was being cracked ... a message was being signed and initialed by Eisenhower proposed a startling departure from the Geneva Convention (GC) — the creation of a new class of prisoners who would not be fed by the Army after the surrender of Germany."[3]The book states that, against the orders of his superiors, Eisenhower took 2 million additional prisoners after Germany's surrender that fell under the DEF designation.[4] Other Losses states that the million soldiers it alleges died had fled the Eastern front and most likely ended up in Rheinwiesenlager prisoner transit camps run by United States and French forces where many such prisoners died of disease or starvation under the cover of the DEF designation.
The book cites orders from Eisenhower which stipulated that the Germans would be solely responsible for feeding and maintaining the DEFs, however he then prevented any aid from reaching them.[5]
Number of prisoners who died
Other Losses claims that nearly one million German prisoners died while being held by United States and French forces at the end of World War II. Specifically, it claims: "The victims undoubtedly number over 800,000, almost certainly over 900,000 and quite likely over a million. Their deaths were knowingly caused by army officers who had sufficient resources to keep the prisoners alive."[1]Other Losses contains an analysis of a medical record that it states supports the conclusion of a prisoner death rate of 30%.[6] Bacque also referred to a 1950 report from the German Red Cross which stated that 1.5 million former German POWs were still officially listed as missing, fate unknown. When the KGB opened its archives in the 1990s, Bacque's estimates for the number of missing POWs that died in Soviet camps was found to be correct.
The book claims that approximately 15% of the deaths in the U.S. camps were from starvation or dehydration and that most deaths were caused by dysentery, pneumonia, or septicaemia, as a result of the unsanitary conditions and lack of medicine.[7] Other Losses further claims that officers from the U.S. Medical Corps reported death rates far higher than they had ever seen before.[8]
The book further states that Eisenhower's staff was complicit in the scheme.[9] Other Losses also states that, in order to carry out his scheme, Eisenhower kept these prisoners in camps far longer than it was necessary[10] It claims that, by the end of 1945, only 40% of prisoners had been released.[11] Other Losses further characterizes the 22-volume German Maschke Commission report investigating the deaths of German prisoners as written by "client-academics" as part of a "cover up" of the deaths that Other Losses alleged occurred.[12]
Treatment of prisoners
Other Losses claims that the U.S. dismantled the German welfare agencies, including the German Red Cross, then dismissed the Swiss Government from its role as Protecting Power. No agencies were allowed to visit the camps or provide any assistance to the prisoners,[13] including delegates from ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross), which was a violation of the Geneva Convention.[14] It further states that the only notable protest against this was from William Lyon Mackenzie King, Prime Minister of Canada.[15]Bacque states that the press was also prevented from visiting the camps, and therefore was unable to report on the state of the camps and the condition of the prisoners.
The book states that many of the U.S. camps consisted of open fields surrounded by barbed wire, with no shelter or toilet facilities. In these camps prisoners were forced to sleep on the ground in the open, though it claims that the U.S. Army had plenty of surplus tents which could have been issued.[16] No supplies such as blankets were supplied to the prisoners, even though these were in good supply at various locations such as the depot at Naples. In a letter General Everett Hughes stated that there were "more stocks than we can ever use; stretch as far as eye can see."[17]
The book quotes Dr. Konrad Adenauer (later Chancellor of Germany) stating that "The German prisoners have been penned up for weeks without any protection from the weather, without drinking water, without medical care. They are being held in a manner contrary to all humanitarian principles and flagrantly contrary to the Hague and Geneva Conventions."[18]
Both J. P. Pradervand (ICRC French Delegation) and Henry Dunning (American Red Cross) sent letters to the State Department condemning the poor treatment of the German prisoners.[19] Colonel Philip Lauben stated that "The Vosges was just one big death camp."[20]
Prisoner totals
The book claims that the U.S. Army employed a number of methods to reduce the number of prisoners officially on hand. One method was to accuse the Russians of taking far more prisoners than they reported.[21] Another was the "midnight shift", whereby the opening balance of a given week was less than the closing balance of the previous week.[22]The book claims that a "Missing Million" prisoners exist in the difference in totals between two U.S. army reports (the last of the daily reports and the first of the weekly reports) issued on June 2, 1945.[23] As a consequence of this, according to Quartermaster's reports the number of rations issued to the camps was reduced by 900,000.[24]
After visiting many of the camps in August 1945, Other Losses states that General Robert Littlejohn (Quartermaster of the ETO) concluded that the U.S. Army was reporting 3.7 million prisoners while it actually possessed 5.2 million, thereby corroborating the conclusions made in a report three months earlier from General J. Lee (in charge of logistics for the ETO), which he had sent to SHAEF headquarters.[25] Other Losses states that Littlejohn subsequently wrote in a report to Washington that because requisitions for supplies were based on these faulty numbers, 1.5 million prisoners were getting no food.[26]
Other Losses states that, three years later, in 1948 the ICRC formally requested documents confirming the total number of prisoners in the U.S. Zone and was eventually told that 3.5 million were there, which omitted approximately 1.7 million from the actual number of 5,224,000.[27][28]
Food shortage
Other Losses explicates the 1944–1949 German food crisis to support the claims for a high mortality rate.[29]Other Losses concludes that the 1945 food crisis in Europe was contrived by Allied forces by the use of restrictive food import policy, including restrictions on Red Cross food deliveries, and other means.[30] It claims that Eisenhower purposefully starved German prisoners given that "[t]here was a lot more wheat available in the combined areas of western Germany, France, Britain, Canada and the USA than there had been in the same year in 1939."[31] Other Losses states that, in May 1945, the ICRC had 100,000 tons of food in storage warehouses in Switzerland.[32] The book claims that, when they tried to send train loads of this food into the U.S. Zone, the U.S. Army sent the trains back, saying their own warehouses were full. Other Losses states that this prompted Max Huber, head of the ICRC, to send a strong letter of protest to the State Department, in which he described the difficulties placed by SHAEF in the way of the ICRC efforts to provide aid. He said "Our responsibility for the proper use of relief supplies placed in our care is incompatible with a restriction to the fulfillment of orders which render us powerless to furnish relief which we ourselves judge necessary."[33]
U.S. Army warehouses had 13.5 million Red Cross food parcels taken from the ICRC, which were never distributed.[34] The book also states that German civilians were prevented from bringing food to the camps,[35] and that Red Cross food parcels were confiscated by SHAEF, and the War Department banned them from being given to the men in the camps.[36] The book states that Bacque found no evidence of a drastic food shortage in the U.S. Army —
- "We had so much food we didn’t know what to do with it." — Colonel Henry Settle, 106th division.
- "We are not in any desperate need of extra food." — Lt Colonel Bailey, SHAEF.
- "There is in this Theater a substantial excess of subsistence ... over 3,000,000 rations a day less than those requisitioned were issued." — General Robert Littlejohn, Quartermaster of the ETO.[37]
- Ambrose, Stephen (1992), "Eisenhower and the Germans", in Bischoff, Gunter; Ambrose, Stephen, Eisenhower and the German POWs, New York: Louisiana State University Press, ISBN 0807117587
- Ambrose, Stephen (February 24, 1991), "Ike and the Disappearing Atrocities", The New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/11/22/specials/ambrose-atrocities.html
- Bacque, James (1989), Other Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners of War at the Hands of the French and Americans After World War II
- Bischoff, Gunter; Ambrose, Stephen (1992), "Introduction", in Bischoff, Gunter; Ambrose, Stephen, Eisenhower and the German POWs, New York: Louisiana State University Press, ISBN 0807117587
- Bischoff, Gunter (1992), "Bacque and Historical Evidence", in Bischoff, Gunter; Ambrose, Stephen, Eisenhower and the German POWs, New York: Louisiana State University Press, ISBN 0807117587
- Bischof, Gunter; Villa, Brian Loring (2003), Was Ike Responsible for the Deaths of Hundreds of Thousands of German POW's? Pro and Con, History News Network, http://hnn.us/articles/1266.html
- Bohme, Kurt W. (1973), Die detschen Kriegsgefangemen in In amerikanischer Hand: Europa
- Cowdrey, Albert E. (1992), "A Question of Numbers", in Bischoff, Gunter; Ambrose, Stephen, Eisenhower and the German POWs, New York: Lousiana State University Press, ISBN 0807117587
- Ferguson, Niall (2004), "Prisoner Taking and Prisoner Killing in the Age of Total War: Towards a Political Economy of Military Defeat", War in History 11 (2)
- Overmans, Rudiger (1992), "German Histiography, the War Losses, and the Prisoners of War", in Bischoff, Gunter; Ambrose, Stephen, Eisenhower and the German POWs, New York: Louisiana State University Press, ISBN 0807117587
- Peterson, Edward N. (1977), The American Occupation of Germany: Retreat to Victory
- Peterson, Edward N. (1990), The Many Faces of Defeat: The German People's Experience in 1945
- Ratza, Werner (1973), "Die deutschen Kriegsgefangenen in der Sowjetunion", in Maschke, Erich, Zur Geschichtte der deutschen Kriegsgefangenen des Zweiten Weltkrieges
- Steininger, Rolf (1992), "Some Reflections on the Maschke Commission", in Bischoff, Gunter; Ambrose, Stephen, Eisenhower and the German POWs, New York: Louisiana State University Press, ISBN 0807117587
- Streit, Charles (1986), "The German Army and the Policies of Genocide", in Hirschfeld, Gerhard, Jew and Soviet Prisoners of War in Nazy Germany
- Tent, James F. (1992), "Food Shortages in Germany and Europe 1945-1948", in Bischoff, Gunter; Ambrose, Stephen, Eisenhower and the German POWs, New York: Louisiana State University Press, ISBN 0807117587
- Villa, Brian Loring (1992), "The diplomatic and Political Context of the POW Camps Tragedy", in Bischoff, Gunter; Ambrose, Stephen, Eisenhower and the German POWs, New York: Louisiana State University Press, ISBN 0807117587
- James Bacque, Other Losses 1991 edition, Prima Publishing, ISBN 1-55958-099-2
- James Bacque, Other Losses revised edition 1999, Little Brown and Company, Boston, New York, Toronto, London ISBN 1-55168-191-9
- James Bacque. Crimes and Mercies: The Fate Of German Civilians Under Allied Occupation, 1944-1950 Little Brown & Company; ISBN 0-7515-2277-5; (August 1997)
- Gunter Bischof and Stephen E. Ambrose. Eisenhower and the German Pows: Facts Against Falsehood (1992)
- Richard Dominic Wiggers, The United States and the Refusal to Feed German Civilians after World War II pp. 274–288, In Várdy, Steven Béla and Tooly, T. Hunt (Eds.) Ethnic Cleansing in Twentieth-Century Europe (year) ISBN
- John Dietrich, The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy Algora Publishing, New York (2002) ISBN 1-892941-90-2
- Other Losses online ebook.
- Lecture by James Bacque about Other Losses.
- Did the Allies Starve Millions of Germans? — This James Bacque article seems to be the main source for the genocide accusation
- New York Times Book Review of Other Losses (or here) by historian Stephen Ambrose.
- Bacque and U.S. Army historian Fisher's reply to Ambrose
MORE ON WAR CRIMES AGAINST GERMAN SOLDIERS BY
U.S. TROOPS
In the aftermath of the Malmedy massacre a written order from the HQ of the 328th US Army Infantry Regiment, dated December 21, 1944, stated: No SS troops or paratroopers will be taken prisoner but will be shot on sight.[33] Major-General Raymond Hufft (U.S. Army) gave instructions to his troops not to take prisoners when they crossed the Rhine in 1945. "After the war, when he reflected on the war crimes he authorized, he admitted, 'if the Germans had won, I would have been on trial at Nuremberg instead of them.'"[34] Stephen Ambrose related: "I've interviewed well over 1000 combat veterans. Only one of them said he shot a prisoner... Perhaps as many as one-third of the veterans...however, related incidents in which they saw other GIs shooting unarmed German prisoners who had their hands up."[35]
In the aftermath of the Malmedy massacre a written order from the HQ of the 328th US Army Infantry Regiment, dated December 21, 1944, stated: No SS troops or paratroopers will be taken prisoner but will be shot on sight.[33] Major-General Raymond Hufft (U.S. Army) gave instructions to his troops not to take prisoners when they crossed the Rhine in 1945. "After the war, when he reflected on the war crimes he authorized, he admitted, 'if the Germans had won, I would have been on trial at Nuremberg instead of them.'"[34] Stephen Ambrose related: "I've interviewed well over 1000 combat veterans. Only one of them said he shot a prisoner... Perhaps as many as one-third of the veterans...however, related incidents in which they saw other GIs shooting unarmed German prisoners who had their hands up."[35]
Near the French village of
Audouville-la-Hubert 30 German Wehrmacht prisoners were
massacred by U.S. paratroopers.[36]
Historian Peter Lieb has found that many US and
Canadian units were ordered to not take prisoners during the D-Day
landings in Normandy. If this view is correct it may explain the
fate of 64 German prisoners (out of 130 captured) who did not make
it to the POW collecting point on
Omaha Beach on D-Day.[37]
According to an article in
Der Spiegel by Klaus Wiegrefe, many personal memoirs of Allied
soldiers have been willfully ignored by historians until now because
they were at odds with the "Greatest
Generation" mythology surrounding WWII, but this has recently
started to change with books such as "The Day of Battle" by
Rick Atkinson where he describes Allied war crimes in Italy, and
"D-Day: The Battle for Normandy," by
Anthony Beevor.[37]
Beevor's latest work is currently discussed by scholars, and should
some of them be proven right that means that Allied war crimes in
Normandy were much more extensive "than was previously realized".[36]
A PECULIAR CRUSADE
American Massacres and War Crimes Against Germans Rivaling Malmedy's Massacre of Americans. This is a copy of relevant pages of this book on Google Books...
http://books.google.com/books?id=7HhkSGLdMpAC&pg=PA118#v=onepage&q&f=false
A PECULIAR CRUSADE
American Massacres and War Crimes Against Germans Rivaling Malmedy's Massacre of Americans. This is a copy of relevant pages of this book on Google Books...
http://books.google.com/books?id=7HhkSGLdMpAC&pg=PA118#v=onepage&q&f=false
Allied war crimes during World War II
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
At the end of World War II, several trials of Axis war criminals took place, most famously the Nuremberg Trials. However, in Europe, these tribunals were set up under the authority of the London Charter, and could only consider allegations of war crimes committed by persons who acted in the interests of the European Axis countries.
There were a number of war crimes involving Allied personnel that were investigated by the Allied powers and that led in some instances to courts-martial. Other incidents are alleged by historians to have been crimes under the law of war in operation at the time, but that for a variety of reasons were not investigated by the Allied powers during the war, or they were investigated and a decision was taken not to prosecute.
Policy
The militaries of the Western Allied nations were directed by their governments to observe the Geneva Conventions and believed that they were conducting a just war fought for defensive reasons. While violations of the conventions did occur (including untried allegations about the bombing of German civilians and the forcible return of Soviet citizens who had been collaborating with the Axis to the USSR at the end of the war), these countries did not engage in mass terror or commit genocide.[1] The military of the Soviet Union frequently committed war crimes at the direction of its government which included waging wars of aggression, mass murder of prisoners of war and repressing the population of conquered countries.[1]Europe
Air raids on civilian population
During the Second World War, the Allied aerial forces performed air raids on civilian populations in Europe and over Japan. These actions were not only defined crimes by some historians[who?] in retrospect, but were also viewed as such by the leaders of the Axis Powers during the war itself, despite the fact they themselves did likewise. On June 6, 1944, at a conference of top Nazi leaders in Klessheim, the German Minister of Foreign Affairs Joachim von Ribbentrop tried to introduce a resolution to define air raids on civilians as acts of terror, but his motion was rejected.[2]Canada
During the fighting at Leonforte in July 1943, according to Mitcham and von Stauffenberg in the book The Battle of Sicily, The Loyal Edmonton Regiment killed captured German prisoners.[3][page needed]Kurt Meyer, of the 12th SS Panzer Division Hitlerjugend, accused Canadian forces of the 3rd Canadian Infantry Division during the 1944 Normandy campaign of breaching the Hague Conventions. He claims that on 7 June notes were found that ordered no prisoners to be taken, information confirmed by Canadian infantry under interrogation; that prisoners were not to be taken if they hindered operations.[4] Hubert Meyer also confirms this story; he states that on 8 June a Canadian notebook was found that contained orders to not take prisoners if they impeded the attacking force.[5] Kurt Meyer also calls upon evidence from Bernhard Siebken’s war crimes trial during which the allegation was made that Canadian infantry shot, on at least one occasion, German soldiers who had surrendered during the campaign.[4]
C.P. Stacey, the Canadian official campaign historian, reports that on 14 April 1945 rumours had been spread that the commanding officer of the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders of Canada had been killed by a civilian sniper; this resulted in the highlanders setting fire to civilian property within the town of Friesoythe in a case of reprisal.[6] Stacey later wrote that the highlanders first removed German civilians from their property before setting the houses on fire, he commented that he was "glad to say that [he] never heard of another such case".[7]
France
Maquis
Following the Operation Dragoon landings in southern France and the collapse of the German military occupation in August 1944, large numbers of Germans could not escape from France and surrendered to the French Forces of the Interior. The Resistance killed few of their German military prisoners, but few of their Gestapo or SS prisoners survived.[8]The Maquis are known to have executed 17 German prisoners of war at Saint-Julien-de-Crempse (in the Dordogne region), 14 of whom have been positively identified, on 10 September 1944. The murders were revenge killings for German murders of 17 local inhabitants of the village of St. Julien on 3 August 1944, which were themselves reprisal killings in response to Resistance activity in the St. Julien region, which was home to an active Maquis cell.[9]
Moroccan Goumiers
See also:
Marocchinate
French
Moroccan troops of the
French Expeditionary Corps, known as
Goumiers, committed mass crimes in Italy during and after
the
Battle of Monte Cassino[10]
and in Germany. According to European sources, more than 12,000
civilians, above all young and old women, children, were
kidnapped, raped, or killed by Goumiers.[11]
This is featured in the Italian film
La Ciociara with
Sophia Loren.Soviet Union
See also:
Soviet war crimes
The
Soviet Union had not signed the
Geneva Convention (1929) relative to the Treatment of
Prisoners of War. This cast doubt on whether the Soviet
treatment of
Axis POWs was a war crime, although they "were [not] treated
even remotely in accordance with the Geneva Convention",[12]
causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands.[13]
However, The Nuremberg Tribunal rejected this as a general
argument, and held that the
Hague Conventions (which the 1929 Geneva Convention did not
replace but only augmented, and unlike the 1929 convention were
ones which the Russian Empire had ratified) and other customary
laws of war regarding the treatment of prisoners of war were
binding on all nations in a conflict.[14][15][16]Acts of mass rape and other war crimes were committed by Soviet troops during the occupation of East Prussia (Danzig),[17][18][19][20] parts of Pomerania and Silesia; during the Battle of Berlin,[21] and the Battle of Budapest.[citation needed]
Late in the war, Yugoslavia's Communist Partisans complained about the rapes and looting commited by the Soviet Army while traversing their country. Milovan Djilas later recalled Joseph Stalin's response,
"Does Djilas, who is himself a writer, not know what human suffering and the human heart are? Can't he understand it if a soldier who has crossed thousands of kilometers through blood and fire and death has fun with a woman or takes some trifle?[22]
United Kingdom
In violation of the Hague Conventions British Line of communication troops conducted small scale looting in Bayeux and Caen, following their liberation, during Operation Overlord.[23]While "no agreement, treaty, convention or any other instrument governing the protection of the civilian population or civilian property" from aerial attack was adopted before the war[24] and Allied forces concluded that an air attack on Dresden was justified on the grounds the city was defended, military justified and attacked military objectives[25] historian Donald Bloxham claims that "the bombing of Dresden on 13–14 February 1945 was a war crime". He further argues that there was a strong prima facie for trying Winston Churchill among others and that there is theoretical case that he could have been found guilty. "This should be a sobering thought. If, however it is also a startling one, this is probably less the result of widespread understanding of the nuance of international law and more because in the popular mind 'war criminal', like 'paedophile' or 'terrorist', has developed into a moral rather than a legal categorisation."[26]
The "London Cage", a MI19 prisoner of war facility in the UK during and immediately after the war, was subject to allegations of torture.[27]
United States
- Canicattì massacre: killing of Italian civilians by Lieutenant Colonel McCaffrey. A confidential inquiry was made, but McCaffrey was never charged with an offence relating to the incident. He died in 1954. This incident remained virtually unknown until Joseph S. Salemi of New York University, whose father witnessed it, publicised it.[28][29]
-
The Dachau massacre: killing of German prisoners of war and surrendering SS soldiers at the Dachau concentration camp.[30]
- In the Biscari massacre, which consists of two instances of mass murders, U.S. troops of the 45th Infantry Division killed roughly 75 prisoners of war, mostly Italian.[31][32]
- Operation Teardrop: Eight of the surviving, captured crewmen from the sunk German submarine U-546 were tortured by US military personnel. Historian Philip K. Lundeberg has written that the beating and torture of U-546's survivors was a singular atrocity motivated by the interrogators' need to quickly get information on what the US believed were potential missile attacks on the continental US by German submarines.[33]
Near the French village of Audouville-la-Hubert, 30 German Wehrmacht prisoners were massacred by U.S. paratroopers.[37]
Frank Sheeran, who served in the 45th Infantry Division, later recalled,
“When an officer would tell you to take a couple of German prisoners back behind the line and for you to ‘hurry back,’ you did what you had to do.”[38]Historian Peter Lieb has found that many US and Canadian units were ordered to not take prisoners during the D-Day landings in Normandy. If this view is correct it may explain the fate of 64 German prisoners (out of 130 captured) who did not make it to the POW collecting point on Omaha Beach on D-Day.[39]
According to an article in Der Spiegel by Klaus Wiegrefe, many personal memoirs of Allied soldiers have been willfully ignored by historians until now because they were at odds with the "Greatest Generation" mythology surrounding World War II, but this has recently started to change with books such as "The Day of Battle" by Rick Atkinson where he describes Allied war crimes in Italy, and "D-Day: The Battle for Normandy," by Anthony Beevor.[39] Beevor's latest work is currently discussed by scholars, and should some of them be proven right that means that Allied war crimes in Normandy were much more extensive "than was previously realized".[37]
Asia and the Pacific War
See also:
Japanese prisoners of war in World War II and
Japanese prisoners of war in the Soviet Union
Allied soldiers[which?]
in
Pacific and Asian theatres sometimes killed Japanese
soldiers who were attempting to surrender or after they had
surrendered. A social historian of the Pacific War,
John W. Dower, states that "by the final years of the war
against Japan, a truly vicious cycle had developed in which the
Japanese reluctance to surrender had meshed horrifically with
Allied disinterest in taking prisoners."[40]
Dower suggests that most Japanese personnel were told that they
would be "killed or tortured" if they fell into Allied hands
and, as a consequence, most of those faced with defeat on the
battlefield fought to the death or committed suicide.[41]
In addition, it was held to be shamefully disgraceful for a
Japanese soldier to surrender, leading many to suicide or fight
to the death regardless of beliefs concerning their possible
treatment as POWs. In fact, the Japanese Field Service Code said
that surrender was not permissible.[42]
And while it was "not official policy" for Allied personnel to
take no prisoners, "over wide reaches of the Asian battleground
it was everyday practice."[43]
There were also widespread reports at the time of Japanese
prisoners killing Allied medical personnel and guards with
concealed weapons after surrendering, leading many Allied
soldiers to conclude that taking prisoners was too risky.[44]China
R. J. Rummel states that there is little information regarding the general treatment of Japanese prisoners taken by Chinese Nationalist forces during the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937–45).[45] However, Chinese civilians and conscripts, as well as Japanese civilians, were maltreated by Chinese soldiers. Rummel claims that Chinese peasants "often had no less to fear from their own soldiers than they did from the Japanese."[46] He also wrote that, in some intakes of Nationalist conscripts, 90% died from disease, starvation or violence, before they had even commenced training.[47] In "The Birth of Communist China", C.P. Fitzgerald describes China under the rule of KMT thus: “the Chinese people groaned under a regime Fascist in every quality except efficiency.” [48]Examples of war crimes committed by Chinese forces include:
- in 1937 near Shanghai, the killing, torture and assault of Japanese POWs and Chinese civilians accused of collaboration, were recorded in photographs taken by Swiss businessman Tom Simmen.[49] (In 1996, Simmen's son released the pictures, showing Nationalist Chinese soldiers committing summary executions by decapitation and shooting, as well as public torture.)
- the Tungchow Mutiny of August 1937; Chinese soldiers recruited by Japan mutinied and switched sides in Tōngzhōu, Beijing, before attacking Japanese civilians and killing 280.[45]
- Nationalist troops in Hubei Province, during May 1943, ordered whole towns to evacuate and then "plundered" them; any civilians who refused and/or were unable to leave, were killed.[46]
Australia
According to Mark Johnston, "the killing of unarmed Japanese was common" and Australian command tried to put pressure on troops to actually take prisoners, but the troops proved reluctant.[50] When prisoners were indeed taken "it often proved difficult to prevent them from killing captured Japanese before they could be interrogated".[51] According to Charles Lindbergh, the Australians often threw prisoners out from aircraft, then claimed they had committed suicide.[51] According to Johnston, as a consequence of this type of behavior; "Some Japanese soldiers were almost certainly deterred from surrendering to Australians".[51] Major General Paul Cullen indicated that the killing of Japanese prisoners in the Kokoda Track Campaign was not uncommon. In one instance he recalled during the battle at Gorari that "the leading platoon captured five or seven Japanese and moved on to the next battle. The next platoon came along and bayoneted these Japanese."[52] He also stated that he found the killings understandable but that it had left him feeling guilty.United States
American soldiers in the Pacific often deliberately killed Japanese soldiers who had surrendered. According to Richard Aldrich, who has published a study of the diaries kept by United States and Australian soldiers, they sometimes massacred prisoners of war.[53] Dower states that in "many instances ... Japanese who did become prisoners were killed on the spot or en route to prison compounds."[43] According to Aldrich it was common practice for U.S. troops not to take prisoners.[54] This analysis is supported by British historian Niall Ferguson,[55] who also says that, in 1943, "a secret [U. S.] intelligence report noted that only the promise of ice cream and three days leave would ... induce American troops not to kill surrendering Japanese."[56]Ferguson states such practices played a role in the ratio of Japanese prisoners to dead being 1:100 in late 1944. That same year, efforts were taken by Allied high commanders to suppress "take no prisoners" attitudes,[56] among their own personnel (as these were affecting intelligence gathering) and to encourage Japanese soldiers to surrender. Ferguson adds that measures by Allied commanders to improve the ratio of Japanese prisoners to Japanese dead, resulted in it reaching 1:7, by mid-1945. Nevertheless, taking no prisoners was still standard practice among U. S. troops at the Battle of Okinawa, in April–June 1945.[57]
Ulrich Straus, a U.S. Japanologist, suggests that frontline troops intensely hated Japanese military personnel and were "not easily persuaded" to take or protect prisoners, as they believed that Allied personnel who surrendered, got "no mercy" from the Japanese.[58] Allied soldiers believed that Japanese soldiers were inclined to feign surrender, in order to make surprise attacks.[58] Therefore, according to Straus, "[s]enior officers opposed the taking of prisoners[,] on the grounds that it needlessly exposed American troops to risks..."[58] When prisoners nevertheless were taken at Gualdacanal, interrogator Army Captain Burden noted that many times these were shot during transport because "it was too much bother to take him in".[59]
Ferguson suggests that "it was not only the fear of disciplinary action or of dishonor that deterred German and Japanese soldiers from surrendering. More important for most soldiers was the perception that prisoners would be killed by the enemy anyway, and so one might as well fight on."[60]
U. S. historian James J. Weingartner attributes the very low number of Japanese in U.S. POW compounds to two important factors, a Japanese reluctance to surrender and a widespread American "conviction that the Japanese were "animals" or "subhuman'" and unworthy of the normal treatment accorded to POWs.[61] The latter reason is supported by Ferguson, who says that "Allied troops often saw the Japanese in the same way that Germans regarded Russians—as Untermenschen."[62]
Mutilation of Japanese war dead
Main article:
American mutilation of Japanese war dead
The collection of Japanese body parts began quite early in the war, prompting a September 1942 order for disciplinary action against such souvenir taking.[64] Harrison concludes that, since this was the first real opportunity to take such items (the Battle of Guadalcanal), "[c]learly, the collection of body parts on a scale large enough to concern the military authorities had started as soon as the first living or dead Japanese bodies were encountered."[65]
When Japanese remains were repatriated from the Mariana Islands after the war, roughly 60 percent were missing their skulls.[66]
In a memorandum dated June 13, 1944, the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General (JAG) asserted that "such atrocious and brutal policies," in addition to being repugnant, were violations of the laws of war, and recommended the distribution to all commanders of a directive pointing out that "the maltreatment of enemy war dead was a blatant violation of the 1929 Geneva Convention on the sick and wounded, which provided that: After every engagement, the belligerent who remains in possession of the field shall take measures to search for wounded and the dead and to protect them from robbery and ill treatment."
These practises were in addition also in violation of the unwritten customary rules of land warfare and could lead to the death penalty.[67] The U.S. Navy JAG mirrored that opinion one week later, and also added that "the atrocious conduct of which some US personnel were guilty could lead to retaliation by the Japanese which would be justified under international law".[67]
Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Main article:
Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
In 1963, the
Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the subject
of a
judicial review in
Ryuichi Shimoda et al. v. The State.[68]
The District Court of Tokyo declined to rule on the legality of
nuclear weapons in general, but found that "the attacks upon
Hiroshima and Nagasaki caused such severe and indiscriminate
suffering that they did violate the most basic legal principles
governing the conduct of war."[69]
Francisco Gómez points out in an article published in the
International Review of the Red Cross that, with respect to
the "anti-city" or "blitz" strategy, that "in examining these
events in the light of international humanitarian law, it should
be borne in mind that during the Second World War there was no
agreement, treaty, convention or any other instrument governing
the protection of the civilian population or civilian property."
[70] The possibility that attacks like the Hiroshima
and Nagasaki bombings could be considered war crimes is one of
the reasons given by
John R. Bolton (Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and
International Security (2001–2005) and
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations (2005))
for the United States not agreeing to be bound by the
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.[71]
although they would not be prosecutable due to their having
occurred prior to the ratification the treaty.Rape
Main articles:
Rape during the occupation of Japan and
War rape
It has been claimed that some U.S. soldiers raped Okinawan
women during the
Battle of Okinawa in 1945.[72]Okinawan historian Oshiro Masayasu (former director of the Okinawa Prefectural Historical Archives) writes based on several years of research:
- Soon after the U.S. Marines landed, all the women of a village on Motobu Peninsula fell into the hands of American soldiers. At the time, there were only women, children and old people in the village, as all the young men had been mobilized for the war. Soon after landing, the Marines "mopped up" the entire village, but found no signs of Japanese forces. Taking advantage of the situation, they started "hunting for women" in broad daylight and those who were hiding in the village or nearby air raid shelters were dragged out one after another.[73]
There were also 1,336 reported rapes during the first 10 days of the occupation of Kanagawa prefecture after the Japanese surrender.[72]
Unrestricted submarine warfare
In the Nuremberg Trial, German Admiral Karl Dönitz was tried, among other crimes, for issuing orders to target Allied civilians, a policy known as unrestricted submarine warfare. Dönitz was found guilty, but no sentence was imposed, because of evidence presented to the Tribunal that the Royal Navy and the United States Navy had issued similar orders.[77]The US Navy applied the same policy to operations in the Pacific. According to Gary E. Weir of the US Naval Historical Center, because of the way war was waged in the Atlantic, "when Admiral Thomas C. Hart proclaimed unrestricted submarine warfare against Japan on 8 December 1941, it came as no surprise".[78]
Comparative death rates of POWs
According to James D. Morrow, "Death rates of POWs held is one measure of adherence to the standards of the treaties because substandard treatment leads to death of prisoners." The "democratic states generally provide good treatment of POWs".[79]Death rates of POWs held by Axis powers
- Chinese POWs held by Japan: 56 reported survivors at the end of the war[80]
- U.S. and British Commonwealth POWs held by Germany: ~4% [79]
- Soviet POWs held by Germany: 57.5% [81]
- Western Allied POWs held by Japan: 27% [82] (Figures for Japan may be misleading though, as sources indicate that either 10,800 [83] or 19,000 [84] of 35,756 fatalities among Allied POW's were from "friendly fire" at sea when their transport ships were sunk. Nonetheless, the Geneva convention required the labeling of such craft as POW ships, which the Japanese neglected to do.)
Death rates of POWs held by the Allies
- German POWs in East European (not including the Soviet Union) hands 32.9%[81]
- German soldiers held by Soviet Union: 15–33% (14.7% in The Dictators by Richard Overy, 35.8% in Ferguson)[81]
- Japanese POWs held by Soviet Union: 10%[citation needed]
- German POWs in British hands 0.03%[81]
- German POWs in American hands 0.15%[81]
- German POWs in French hands 2.58%[81]
- Japanese POWs held by U.S.: relatively low, mainly suicides according to James D. Morrow.[85]
- Japanese POWs in Chinese hands: 24%[citation needed]
Summary table
| origin | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| in hands of |
 USSR |
 US
&
 UK |
 ROC |
Western Allied |
 Nazi
Germany |
 Japan |
|
Soviet
Union |
– | – | – | – | 14.7–35.8% | 10% |
|
United
Kingdom |
– | – | – | – | 0.03% | |
|
United
States |
– | – | – | – | 0.15% | varying |
 France |
– | – | – | – | 2.58% | |
| East European | – | – | – | – | 32.9% | |
|
Nazi
Germany |
57.5% | 4% | – | – | ||
|
Japan |
not documented | 27% | – | – | ||
No comments:
Post a Comment