04 August 2010

Adolf Eichmann trial: 1960-2010

In my high school, students had to write and present one major history project each year. In 1961, mine was on the Eichmann trial. I may have forgotten some of the details, but I have never forgotten the emotional impact that this history had on my teenage mind.

After joining the SS in 1934, Adolf Eichmann rose quickly in responsibility. He made himself an expert on Jewish matters, including studying Hebrew and spending some time in Israel. After the March 1938 union of Germany and Austria, this German-born and Austrian-raised officer was put in charge of the SS unit that handled forced Jewish emigration from Austria.

In January 1939, the Nazis established a similar office for all German-occupied lands. The office was reorganised after WW2 broke out in September 1939 and Eichmann was the logical choice to head up the new team. Over the next few years, its work evolved from expelling Jews from Germany to transporting Jews to extermination camps in Poland.

Adolf Eichmann did not create the Final Solution, but he was the senior Nazi official concerned solely with the imprisonment of all Jewish people in Nazi Europe. He coordinated the deportation of Jews from Germany and its occupied territories. And when Nazi plans moved into genocide, Eichmann organised the transportation of Jews to extermination camps.

After the war, Eichmann and his men disguised themselves as ordinary German soldiers, to escape the Allied forces. Clearly Eichmann's relatively low rank hid the nature and importance of his work, so when he was captured by Allied soldiers, he easily escaped. How extraordinary! In January 1946, Eichmann was even discussed at the Nuremburg war crimes trials as the man who ran the Nazis' murderous scheme.

Eichmann understood that he had to get out of Dodge, and quickly. For the next four years Eichmann stayed somewhere in Germany, always out of the reach of the authorities. Then, somehow, he travelled safely to Argentina. History Today showed that he must have felt very safe in Buenos Aires because he bought a house, held down a job and lived a normal family life as Ricardo Klement. And as the 1950s rolled on, he was correct. Nazi hunting was of no interest to Western governments who now saw Russia as the enemy, not Nazi Germany.

Eichmann inside his trial booth, Jerusalem

But capturing Nazi war criminals had always been a major concern of Jewish organisations and Holocaust survivors. After its creation in 1948, the new State of Israel was determined to hunt down Nazi war criminals and bring them to justice. As part of these efforts and perhaps the top priority case altogether, Eichmann was tracked down in Argentina by Jewish secret servicemen.

The Israelis knew that taking Eichmann from Argentina might been seen as violating Argentina's sovereignty. West Germany and East Germany may have also had a case for demanding that the Eichmann trial be conducted in their courts. But after substantional advice on international law, his captors transported Eichmann to Israel in 1960 and tried him for war crimes in 1961.

In all democracies, however heinous the crimes of which they are charged, the accused are entitled to a proper trial. Thus the trial had to be fair and open, and the prosecution still had to prove Eichmann's guilt. Eichmann had the right to a barrister of his choice; he chose a German lawyer, Dr Robert Servatius, with experience defending accused war criminals. The State of Israel paid for part of the defence and the Knesset passed legislation enabling the German barrister to appear before an Israel court. Although the case was conducted in Hebrew, Eichmann gave all his evidence in German and had running translations of the witnesses’ evidence into German.

In any case, the Jewish state’s primary motive in conducting an open trial before the world’s scrutiny was never revenge. In 1960-1, memories of the Holocaust were still very fresh. Most Ashkenazi citizens in the country had lost their parents and siblings during the war and wanted to document the details of the atrocities, while there were still thousands of witnesses alive. Israelis saw the Eichmann trial as a way to educate the new generation of Israelis and the world about a vicious, anti-Semitic and totalitarian government.

Bruce Brager noted that far more documentary evidence was collected than needed to convict Eichmann, but Chief Prosecutor Gideon Hausner wanted to add human meaning to dry statistics when presenting his case. The way to make the history meaningful to every individual was through
the personal testimony of eye witnesses.

The Israelis collected a huge amount of evidence from the Germans’ own official archives and from post-war investigations in Europe. In fact the German records collected in Jerusalem for the Eichmann trial greatly outweighed that which had been available to the prosecution authorities at Nuremberg.

Eichmann’s defence was that he had been given a task to perform, because of the success he had found in earlier assignments, particularly the deportation of Jews from Austria. Ultimately Eichmann saw himself as just an ordinary bureaucrat, merely following orders from above. He was quiet and self-controlled throughout his trial in the bullet-proof glass booth.

After an excruciatingly long and detailed trial, Dr Servatius denied the validity of the Nazis and Nazi Collaboration Punishment Law, arguing that the destruction of the Jewish people had not depended on Eichmann. Nonetheless the prisoner was found guilty; later he was sentenced to death and, after an appeal, hanged.

I am very sorry that Israel, a nation with no capital punishment whatsoever, before or since Eichmann, executed a human being (even a Nazi leader). But my parents, aunts and uncles were in Australia during the war. Perhaps I would have felt differently had they been fodder to Eichmann’s extermination machinery.


columnist said...

Thanks for that. A useful reminder always, and sadly one that includes the fact that humankind never learns from its abhorrent behaviour.

Hermes said...

Good post. The capture I always found very interesting and it is doubtful if it was actually legal (though moral). Golda lied at the time saying he had been captured by 'private individuals'. The whole role of Argentina is another story but very interesting.

Hels said...

columnist and Hermes, it is a really vexed question.

If Nazi hunting really was of no interest to Western governments who a] themselves gave safe refuge to endless number of ex-Nazis and b] wanted all their energies devoted to fighting the Russian bloc, would any other nation have brought Eichmann to trial? By 1957, when they started chasing Eichmann, nobody gave a hoot how the ex-Nazis lived out their lives in Agentina or anywhere else.

We have to remind ourselves that 1957 was only 12 years after the end of the war at that stage, when the trail was still hot.

There is a Hungarian Nazi in Western Australia who has been wanted for war crimes against civilians for years, but the Australian government hasn't the political will to deport him and the Hungarian government didn't issue a warrant for his arrest until 2005. What were they waiting for - for him to die of really old age?

Hollywood Russ said...

Congratulations on your award! Ave! Brava!

Hollywood Russ said...

I'm so sorry. I didn't realize it was accepting my posts!

Stela James said...

Your Blog is Fabulous. Good article rather. Very interesting.

home business

Clipping Path said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
andreasmoser said...

I have written a review about the film "The Specialist" about the Eichmann trial: http://andreasmoser.wordpress.com/2010/12/18/film-review-the-specialist-eichmann/

Hels said...


It is now exactly 50 years since the trial so I went back to reread your review of the film The Specialist. Many thanks.

Historians are constantly rewriting their material, in light of changing data and changing historical perspectives. What seemed obvious in 1961 make look quite different in 2011.

Two new books have come out to mark the 60th anniversary. Deborah Lipstadt has written a fresh account in "The Eichmann Trial", published by Schocken, 2011.

And from David Cesarani a recommendation for Bettina Stangneth's book, "Eichmann vor Jerusalem", which has already been published in German (when in English?).

I suppose, as you suggested, the biggest change has been from seeing Eichmann as an extremely talented bureaucrat who merely followed all orders, albeit with relish (a la "Eichmann in Jerusalem: The Banality of Evil" by Arendt 1963). Instead Eichmann now appears to have been brilliant, tenacious, alert and utterly in charge of his own life.

Image Clipping Path said...

Thank you so much such a informative post. Keep it up...

Mostafizur Rahman said...

Your blog is fantastic.Excellent article.Thanks...

Attache Pr said...

I just loved your writing. It's a memorandum that reflects your earlier life. You are a good story teller.

Habib Zaman said...

I like your ARCHITECTURE blog!I love to see these kind of outstanding work. Thanks a lot for sharing.

Rustam Ali said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.