The Family Perspective [70 Years after Nuremberg]

Courtesy of this month’s guest blogger, Chris Dodd

Nuremberg Palace

Nuremberg Palace

This year marks the 70th anniversary of one of the most important achievements in the history of the United States, and indeed the world; the anniversary of triumph of justice and the rule of law over the desire for vengeance. I am talking, of course, about the Nuremberg War Tribunal that brought the atrocities of the Holocaust to light, and the men who perpetrated them to justice, following the end of World War II.

This was an incredible achievement for mankind. As Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson said at the outset of the trial, “That four great nations, flushed with victory and stung with injury stay the hand of vengeance and voluntarily submit their captive enemies to the judgement of the law is one of the most significant tributes that Power has ever paid to Reason.” As a son of Thomas J. Dodd, this moment in human history has particular significance to me and my family. As a young, 38 year old lawyer, my father was asked to stand up and serve his country as a prosecutor with a solemn obligation to the victims and survivors of the Nazi atrocities to ensure that justice prevailed over inhumanity.

Continue reading

Questions Are Asked [70 Years After Nuremberg]

Nuremberg Palace

Nuremberg Palace

As summer drew to a close, work commenced in earnest in Nürnberg. Tom Dodd took on the responsibility of questioning Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel, Franz von Papen, and Dr. Arthur Seyss-Inquart. Formal questioning began on August 28th with Keitel. Writing to his wife Grace, Dodd described Keitel as a gentle, polite, very proper man, and wrote, “Sometimes I find myself liking him- and feeling sorry for him. He is a very bright man—in my opinion—and a very charming one too” [p.111, 8/30/1945].

blog_p116_09011945

Portion of letter dated 1 September 1945

The darker side of Keitel came out questioning on September 1st, 1945, when he admitted to the slaughtering of innocent men, women, and children hostages, but only after devastating attacks against the Germans [p.116,9/1/45].  Several days earlier (8/29), Dodd had caught Keitel in a lie; Keitel having claimed that he had no intention of harming the U.S prior to the summer of 1941.  This statement was contradicted by research documenting an October 1940  conference took place with Molotov and the Japanese, leading to the Russo-Japanese agreement which outlined a plan that was enacted in the Summer and Fall of 1941 in which the Japanese would attack and invade Russia.  A letter dated 5 May 1941, expressed the desire to seek an earlier intervention with the U.S and it was suggested that the Japanese take the offensive against United States—definitely earlier than Keitel’s recollection. Continue reading

August 1945 [70 Years after Nuremberg]

Nuremberg Palace

Nuremberg Palace

With the establishment of the International Military Tribunal (IMT) to be held in Nürnberg, Germany, the real work of creating an appropriate space for the court and the necessary supporting operations began.  Thomas J. Dodd, a Connecticut lawyer on the staff of the FBI, was selected by Justice Robert Jackson, the lead prosecutor for the United States, to participate in the herculean task of collecting and sorting through the available documentation to begin formulating the U.S. team’s legal plan for the upcoming trial.  Arriving in London in late July 1945, Dodd began gathering information.  Writing to his wife, Dodd recounts the devastation of London as a result of bombing and his travels to some of the more well-known sights before moving on to Paris in early August following the finalization of the British, French and Soviet legal teams.

Portion of letter dated 7 August 1945

Portion of letter dated 7 August 1945

Although frustrated with his assignment, he writes “I have thought of it but have decided to give myself and the job a better chance by way of time.  You see it is a Colonel’s clique—from top to bottom—and it is provokingly unpleasant for civilians.  I believe a terrible mistake has been made in this respect.  It should be run by civilians in the name of the civil population and in the interest of peace by way of contributing to the prevention of war.” [p. 79, 8/7/1945]. Continue reading

70 Years After Nuremberg

Nuremberg Palace

Nuremberg Palace of Justice, 1945.

On August 8, 1945, representatives of the United Kingdom, United States, provisional government of France and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics signed the Agreement and Charter establishing the International Military Tribunal for the prosecution and punishment of the major War Criminals, known as the London Charter.   The result of long and difficult negotiations that began while the Allied forces pushed in on the German lines from both east and west, the London Charter was concluded almost three months to the day that Germany surrendered to the Soviet Union.

The charter of the International Military Tribunal (IMT) declared that aggressive war was an international crime and established the IMT court in Nuremberg, Germany to try the remaining major German leaders for their actions both before and during World War II. Nuremberg was notorious as the city where Hitler had proclaimed his racial laws in 1935. Four judges from the United States, Great Britain, France, and the Soviet Union, as well as alternates for each, were assigned the jurisdiction to try high ranking German government, military, and civilian leaders deemed personally responsible for the specific crimes. This would be the first time that an international court would hold a government responsible for its treatment of both its own citizens and citizens of other countries during war time. Continue reading

Foreshadowed warnings and Unlikely Alliances

American foreign policy in the Middle East has long been characterized by uneasy alliances with unlikely partners.  For the last decade, our partners in the region have provided important support to American military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. However, as the wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq come to a close many academics are beginning to question whether certain alliances have been as helpful as many believe. In particular, American support for Saudi Arabia has been unwavering since the 2001 attacks despite the majority of the hijackers’ involved being Saudi nationals.  When compared with the human rights record of Saudi Arabia in basic legal proceedings one begins to question why American foreign policy personnel believe this relationship is beneficial for American image abroad.

In 1996 there was a terrorist attack on the Khobar Towers, a popular apartment building used by foreign military personnel in Khobar Saudi Arabia. Nineteen of those killed were American airmen. In response to this an open letter was written by Chandra Muzaffar (1996), Lessons from the blast: Opposition to US Alliance is strong within the kingdoms middle class.  The letter is very concise but provides an extreme amount of foresight into the future problems with United States involvement in the region. Firstly, it points out that the King of Saudi Arabia is considered the custodian of the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, and because US policy seems to dictate much of the royal families’ actions many are beginning to view the United States as ‘the custodian of the custodian’. Information obtained from the 9/11 Commission report has indicated that many of the hijackers from Saudi Arabia were indeed middle class well- educated persons.

Continue reading

Rios Montt does the Pinochet

montt

10 May 2013:

Over thirty years after the Scorched Earth campaign by the military and death squads in Guatemala, General Efrain Rios Montt is convicted of genocide committed against the Mayan’s of the Ixil region.  Like the notorious Chilean dictator, Augusto Pinochet, Montt (86 years old) was brought to trial late in life – however, the distinction of having been forced into the courtroom, despite legal defense attempting to waylay the inevitable, is what stands between the two notorious figureheads.  Montt’s sentence of 80 years in prison stands as a penalty for the crime versus a punishment he can withstand.  This precedent setting national conviction will serve as a warning to both heads of state and top ranking military officials that impunity, even in the most stratified of countries, can be challenged.        

Filmmakers Pamela Yates and Paco de Onis (When the Mountains Tremble and Granito) were on hand for both the filming of the trial as well as witnessing their own footage used as evidence in the closing remarks against Montt.  A great collection of daily summaries from the trial can be seen in their ongoing film series Dictator in the Docket.  Though the conviction has happened, the greivances still exist for the crimes committed in Guatemala.  With this piece of history, a social dialogue can begin to unpack the roots of an extermination campaign against indigenous peoples and their corresponding position in society today.

Human Rights and Archives Lecture, TODAY!

Human Rights and Archives: The Role of Archives to Help Bring Transitional Justice

Join Dr. Joel A. Blanco-Rivera, Assistant Professor of Archival Studies at Simmons College Graduate School of Library and Information Science as he explores the emerging role of archives in the field of human rights. Are archives neutral keepers of records or social actors whose work shapes the historical record? His focus will include the role of archives as mechanisms of transitional justice in Latin America.

Following the program, join us for a reception to meet and share ideas with Graham Stinnett, Human Rights Archivist for the UConn Libraries.

Monday, April 1
3:00pm Lecture – Homer Babbidge Library, Class of 1947 Room
4:00pm Reception – Dodd Research Center, Public Lounge

Sponsored by the UConn Libraries, Human Rights Institute, Thomas J. Dodd Research Center and El Instituto

For more information, contact: Marisol Ramos at marisol.ramos@lib.uconn.edu

Guatemalan Criminal Tribunal Begins

logbook

From the Guatemalan Human Rights Commission:

In Guatemala today, Efraín Ríos Montt and José Mauricio Rodríguez Sánchez are going to trial on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity for massacres committed against indigenous civilians in Guatemala’s Ixil triangle. This historic case is the first time that a former head of state is being tried for genocide in a domestic court. It is crucial for the nation’s healing process, and will be a key step in ending impunity for the atrocities committed during the war.”

The trial of these major military leaders is an important attempt by human rights defenders and victims to bring those still able to stand trial to justice.  The crimes commited against those who lost life and loved ones to the Guatemalan state’s coordinated terror campaign form a seminal era in Cold War history.  The targeted killing of indigenous peoples across Central America in the name of fighting communism on the US’s dime lays bare the implications of imperialism, indigeneity and land use in a stratified third world country of the 1980s.

Follow the trial monitoring blog organized by the Open Society Justice Initiative!  To access video resources relating to Guatemala’s indigenous struggle, two important films are available in Babbidge library: When the Mountains Tremble, and Granito: How to Nail a Dictator. For a comprehensive archival collection, the Guatemalan Documentation Project coordinated by the National Security Archive contains key documents that will be utilized in the trial.