The execution of the fascists after the Nuremberg trials. Nazi execution

and other sources.

All are clickable.

* Extremist and terrorist organizations banned in the Russian Federation: Jehovah's Witnesses, National Bolshevik Party, Right Sector, Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), Islamic State (IS, ISIS, Daesh), Jabhat Fatah ash-Sham ”,“ Jabhat al-Nusra ”,“ Al-Qaeda ”,“ UNA-UNSO ”,“ Taliban ”,“ Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people ”,“ Misanthropic Division ”,“ Brotherhood ”of Korchinsky,“ Trident named after. Stepan Bandera "," Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists "(OUN)

Now on the main

Related Articles

• Economy

  

  Channel "Axioma"

  Such a jerk - Get hooked on Chinese wheels

  Has the technological breakthrough promised by Vladimir Putin taken place? Due to the deficit, Russia will buy up to 800 thousand railway wheels in China, RBC writes. Current commentary by Professor Stepan Sulakshin.

  16.02.2019 21:05 80

  Society

  

  Channel "Axioma"

  "How dare you, impudent person, with an unclean snout ..." - Fighting fakes or freedom?

  Current commentary of Professor S. Sulakshin to the news. "The deputies propose to establish a maximum fine of up to 400 thousand rubles for citizens if the dissemination of deliberately inaccurate socially significant information caused tragic consequences, including the death of a person or the termination of the operation of life support facilities and transport." - Interfax reports. Sulakshin Center website http://rusrand.ru/ New Type Party: http://rusrand.ru/pnt/ PF channel https://www.youtube.com/user/Sulakshi ... People's ...

  15.02.2019 23:47 22

  Politics

  

  Channel "Axioma"

  Offended Platoshkin threatened Sulakshin with a court - Is the US always wrong

  S. Sulakshin about his meeting with the promoted Kremlin TV star Platoshkin on the set of the TV show "Spas". Platoshkin was so offended by the revealing video about him that he did not shake hands with Stepan Stepanovich and threatened to sue. And another question, is the United States always wrong, as our politicians and propaganda are trying to impose on us?

  13.02.2019 17:24 79

  Society

  

  Channel "Axioma"

  "It is forbidden to survive" - ​​the country law came into force

  Ogorodnikov will be ruined by extortions. On January 1, 2019, the "Dacha Law" signed by President Vladimir Putin came into force. No. 217-FZ "On the conduct of gardening and truck farming by citizens for their own needs and on amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation." This law prohibits the sale of products grown on their garden plot. Summer residents and gardeners are not allowed to trade their ...

  13.02.2019 13:00 72

  Politics

  

  Channel "Axioma"

  China can no longer catch up - The retirement age is being lowered in Europe. Results of the week

  Back in 2000, at the beginning of Putin's presidency, China's GDP was equal to Russia's. Now, only the gross regional product of one Chinese city of Beijing has grown by 6.6% and exceeded 3 million yuan in 2018. This is approximately 30% of the total Russian GDP. The economies of three cities, such as Beijing, are equal to the entire economy of Russia. Analysis of externally economic ...

  5.02.2019 15:27 48

  Politics

  

  Channel "Axioma"

  Everything is positive for Putin, and 90% of Russians do not see a rise in wages. Outcomes

  The President, his Prime Minister Medvedev and Rosstat have repeatedly made statements that they are seeing a record increase in salaries since 2012. According to a poll by the holding company Romir, 90% of Russians did not feel the growth of their income. Today, 6% of the respondents have not only not increased their salaries, but also decreased. But still, such a minimum number, if you count from ...

  3.02.2019 22:45 57

  Politics

  

  Channel "Axioma"

  "Sell and finish the Second World War?" - The welfare state has been trampled underfoot. Outcomes

  Results of the Week with Stepan Sulakshin. Answering the rather acute and correct questions of Vladimir Solovyov, press secretary Dmitry Peskov said "The task is not to give something or receive something, but to sign a peace treaty, to end the Second World War." And with his statement, he caused a wave of indignation on social networks. Vladimir Rudolfovich is right, they lived for 70 years without a peace treaty, it is possible to continue ...

November 20, 1945 at 10:00 in the small German town of Nuremberg opened an international trial in the case of the main Nazi war criminals of the European countries of the Rome-Berlin-Tokyo axis. This city was not chosen by chance: for many years it was a citadel of fascism, an unwitting witness to the congresses of the National Socialist Party and the parades of its storm troops. The Nuremberg Trials were carried out by the International Military Tribunal (IMT), created on the basis of the London Agreement of August 8, 1945 between the governments of the leading allied states - the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and France, which was joined by 19 other countries - members of the Anti-Hitler coalition. The agreement was based on the provisions of the Moscow Declaration of October 30, 1943 on the responsibility of the Nazis for the atrocities committed, under which the leaders of the USSR, the USA and Great Britain put their signatures.

The building of the Palace of Justice in Nuremberg, where the Nuremberg trials took place

The establishment of a military tribunal with international status became possible largely thanks to the creation at the conference in San Francisco (April-June 1945) of the United Nations, a world security organization that united all peace-loving states, which jointly rendered a worthy rebuff to fascist aggression. The Tribunal was established in the interests of all countries - members of the United Nations, which, after the end of the bloodiest of wars, set as their main goal "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war: and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person." So it is written in the UN Charter. At that historical stage, immediately after the end of the Second World War, for these purposes it was extremely necessary to popularly recognize the Nazi regime and its main leaders as guilty of unleashing an aggressive war against practically all of humanity, which brought it monstrous grief and untold suffering. Officially condemning Nazism and making it illegal meant ending one of the threats that could potentially lead to a new world war in the future. In his opening remarks at the first session of the court, the presiding Lord Justice J. Lawrence (MWM UK member) emphasized the uniqueness of the process and its "social significance for millions of people around the globe." That is why a huge responsibility lay on the members of the international court. They had to "honestly and conscientiously carry out their duties without any connivance, in accordance with the sacred principles of law and justice."

The organization and jurisdiction of the International Military Tribunal were determined by its Charter, which constituted an integral part of the 1945 London Agreement.According to the Charter, the tribunal had the right to judge and punish persons who, acting in the interests of the European countries of the Axis, individually or as members of an organization, committed crimes against peace, military crimes and crimes against humanity. The IMT consisted of judges - representatives from the four founding states (one from each country), their deputies and chief prosecutors. The main prosecutors were appointed to the Committee: from the USSR - R.A. Rudenko, from the USA - Robert H. Jackson, from the UK - H. Shawcross, from France - F. de Menton, and then Ch. De Ribes. The Committee was entrusted with the investigation of the cases of the main Nazi criminals and their prosecution. The process was built on a combination of procedural orders of all states represented in the tribunal. Decisions were taken by a majority vote.

In the courtroom

Almost the entire ruling elite of the Third Reich was in the dock - the highest military and statesmen, diplomats, major bankers and industrialists: G. Goering, R. Hess, I. von Ribbentrop, V. Keitel, E. Kaltenbrunner, A. Rosenberg, H. . Frank, W. Frick, J. Streicher, W. Funk, K. Doenitz, E. Raeder, B. von Schirach, F. Sauckel, A. Jodl, A. Seiss-Inquart, A. Speer, K. von Neurath , H. Fritsche, J. Schacht, R. Lei (hanged himself in the cell before the start of the trial), G. Krupp (was declared terminally ill, his case was suspended), M. Bormann (tried in absentia, since he disappeared and did not was found) and F. von Papen. Only the most senior leaders of Nazism - Hitler, Goebbels and Himmler, who committed suicide during the storming of Berlin by the Red Army, were not in the courtroom. The defendants were participants in all major domestic and foreign political, as well as military events since Hitler came to power. Therefore, according to the French publicist R. Cartier, who was present at the trial and wrote in 1946 the book “Secrets of War. According to the materials of the Nuremberg trials "," their trial was a trial over the regime as a whole, over an entire era, over the whole country. "

The chief prosecutor from the USSR at the Nuremberg trials R.A. Rudenko

The International Military Tribunal also considered the issue of recognizing as criminal the leadership of the National Socialist Party (NSDAP), its assault (SA) and security detachments (SS), the security service (SD) and the state secret police (Gestapo), as well as the government cabinet, the General Staff and the High Command (OKW) of Nazi Germany. All crimes committed by the Nazis during the war were subdivided in accordance with the Charter of the International Military Tribunal for crimes:

Against peace (planning, preparing, unleashing or waging an aggressive war or war in violation of international treaties);

War crimes (violations of the laws or customs of war: murder, torture or slavery of civilians; murder or torture of prisoners of war; robbery of state, public or private property; destruction or plundering of cultural property; senseless destruction of cities or villages);

Crimes against humanity (destruction of Slavic and other peoples; creation of secret points for the destruction of civilians; killing of the mentally ill).

The International Military Tribunal, which has been in session for almost a year, has done a tremendous job. During the process, 403 open court sessions were held, 116 witnesses were questioned, over 300 thousand written testimonies and about 3 thousand documents were considered, including photo and film accusations (mainly official documents of German ministries and departments, the High Command of the Wehrmacht, the General Staff, military concerns and banks, materials from personal archives). If Germany had won the war, or if the end of the war had not been so swift and crushing, then all these documents (many with the heading "Top Secret"), most likely, would have been destroyed or were forever hidden from the world community. Numerous witnesses who testified during the trial, according to R. Cartier, were not limited to mere facts, but covered and commented on them in detail, "bringing new shades, colors and the spirit of the era itself." In the hands of judges and prosecutors were incontrovertible evidence of the Nazis' criminal designs and bloody atrocities. Wide publicity and openness became one of the main principles of the international process: more than 60 thousand passes were issued for the presence in the courtroom, the sessions were held simultaneously in four languages, the press and radio were represented by about 250 journalists from different countries.

The numerous crimes of the Nazis and their accomplices, revealed and made public during the Nuremberg trials, are truly amazing. Everything that could be invented prohibitively cruel, inhuman and antihuman was included in the arsenal of the fascists. Here we should mention the barbaric methods of warfare, and the cruel treatment of prisoners of war, grossly violating all international conventions previously adopted in these areas, and the enslavement of the population of the occupied territories, and the targeted destruction of entire cities and villages from the face of the earth, and sophisticated technologies of mass destruction. ... The world was shocked by the facts voiced during the process about the savage experiments on people, about the massive use of special preparations for killing "Cyclone A" and "Cyclone B", about the so-called gas vans, gas "baths" that work without stopping day and night in powerful cremation ovens. Nazi subhumans, cynically considering themselves the only chosen nation that has the right to decide the fate of other peoples, created a whole "industry of death." The death camp in Auschwitz, for example, was designed to exterminate 30 thousand people a day, Treblinka - 25 thousand, Sobibur - 22 thousand, etc. In total, 18 million people passed through the system of concentration camps and death camps, about 11 million of whom were brutally destroyed.

Nazi criminals in the dock

Accusations of the incompetence of the Nuremberg trials, which arose years after its end among Western revisionist historians, some lawyers and neo-Nazis, and boiled down to the fact that it was allegedly not a fair trial, but a "quick reprisal" and "revenge" of the winners, at least untenable. All the defendants were already on October 18, 1945, that is, more than a month before the start of the trial, an indictment was served so that they could prepare for their defense. Thus, the basic rights of the accused were respected. The world press, commenting on the Indictment, noted that this document was drawn up on behalf of the "offended conscience of mankind", that this was not "an act of revenge, but the triumph of justice", not only the leaders of Nazi Germany, but the entire system of fascism would appear before the court. It was the supremely just judgment of the peoples of the world.

I. von Ribbentrop, B. von Schirach, V. Keitel, F. Sauckel in the dock

The defendants were given a broad opportunity to defend themselves against the charges brought against them: they all had lawyers, they were provided with copies of all documentary evidence in German, assistance was provided in the search and obtaining the necessary documents, and the delivery of witnesses whom the defenders considered necessary to call. However, the accused and their lawyers from the very beginning of the trial took a course to prove the legal inconsistency of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal. In an effort to avoid inevitable punishment, they tried to shift all responsibility for the crimes committed exclusively to Adolf Hitler, the SS and the Gestapo, put forward counter-accusations against the founding states of the tribunal. It is characteristic and indicative that none of them had the slightest doubt about their complete innocence.

G. Goering and R. Hess in the dock

After painstaking and meticulous work, which lasted almost a year, on September 30 - October 1, 1946, the Judgment of the International Court of Justice was announced. It analyzed the basic principles of international law violated by Nazi Germany, the arguments of the parties, and gave a picture of the criminal activities of the fascist state over more than 12 years of its existence. The International Military Tribunal found all the defendants (with the exception of Schacht, Fritsche and von Papen) guilty of conspiracy to prepare and conduct wars of aggression, as well as countless war crimes and atrocities against humanity. Twelve Nazi criminals were sentenced to death by hanging: Goering, Ribbentrop, Keitel, Kaltenbrunner, Rosenberg, Frank, Frick, Streichel, Sauckel, Jodl, Seyss-Inquart, Bormann (in absentia). The rest received various terms of imprisonment: Hess, Funk, Raeder - for life, Schirach and Speer - 20 years, Neurath - 15 years, Doenitz - 10 years.

The representative of the prosecution from France speaks

The tribunal also found the leadership of the National Socialist Party, SS, SD and Gestapo criminal. Thus, even the verdict, according to which only 11 out of 21 defendants were sentenced to death, and three were generally acquitted, clearly showed that the justice was not formal and nothing was predetermined in advance. At the same time, a member of the international court from the USSR - the country most affected by the hands of Nazi criminals, Major General of Justice I.T. Nikitchenko, in his Dissenting Opinion, stated that the Soviet side of the court did not agree with the acquittal of three defendants. He spoke in favor of the death penalty against R. Hess, and also expressed disagreement with the decision not to recognize the Nazi government, the High Command, the General Staff and the SA as criminal organizations.

The convicts' petitions for clemency were rejected by the Control Council for Germany, and on the night of October 16, 1946, the death sentence was carried out (shortly before that, Goering committed suicide).

Following the largest and longest international trial in history in Nuremberg, 12 more trials took place in the city until 1949, in which the crimes of more than 180 Nazi leaders were examined. Most of them also received their well-deserved punishment. Military tribunals that took place in Europe after the end of World War II also in other cities and countries, convicted a total of more than 30 thousand Nazi criminals. However, many Nazis guilty of brutal crimes, unfortunately, managed to escape from justice. But their search was not stopped, but continued: the UN made an important decision not to take into account the statute of limitations for Nazi criminals. So, only in the 1960s-1970s, tens and hundreds of Nazis were found, arrested and convicted. On the basis of the materials of the Nuremberg trial, E. Koch (in Poland) and in 1963 A. Eichmann (in Israel) were brought to trial and sentenced to death.

It is important to emphasize that the purpose of the international process in Nuremberg was to condemn the Nazi leaders - the main ideological inspirers and leaders of unjustifiably cruel actions and bloody atrocities, and not the entire German people. In this regard, the British representative at the trial said in his closing speech: “I repeat again that we do not seek to blame the people of Germany. Our goal is to protect him and give him the opportunity to rehabilitate himself and win the respect and friendship of the whole world. But how can this be done if we leave in its midst unpunished and uncondemned these elements of Nazism, which are mainly responsible for tyranny and crimes and which, as the tribunal can believe, cannot be turned to the path of freedom and justice? " As for the military leaders, in the opinion of some, who were only fulfilling their military duty, unquestioningly following the orders of the political leadership of Germany, it should be emphasized that the tribunal condemned not just "disciplined warriors", but people who considered "war a form of existence" and who never learned "lessons from the experience of defeat in one of them."

To the question asked by the accused at the very beginning of the Nuremberg trials: "Do you plead guilty?", All the accused, as one, answered in the negative. But even after almost a year - enough time for rethinking and reevaluating their actions - they did not change their minds.

“I do not recognize the decision of this court: I continue to be loyal to our Fuehrer,” Goering said in his last word at the trial. “Let's wait twenty years. Germany will rise again. Whatever judgment this judgment handed down to me, I will be found innocent before the face of Christ. I am ready to repeat everything one more time, even if it means that they will burn me alive, ”- these words belong to R. Hess. A minute before the execution Streichel exclaimed: “Heil Hitler! With God!". Jodl echoed him: "I salute you, my Germany!"

The process also condemned the militant German militarism, which was "the core of the Nazi party as well as the core of the armed forces." Moreover, it is important to understand that the concept of "militarism" is by no means connected with the military profession. This is a phenomenon that, since the Nazis came to power, permeated the entire German society, all spheres of its activity - political, military, social, economic. The militaristic German leaders preached and practiced the dictatorship of the military. They themselves enjoyed the war and sought to instill the same attitude in their “flock”. Moreover, the need to resist evil, also with the help of weapons, on the part of the peoples who have become the target of aggression, could rebound at them themselves.

In his concluding speech at the trial, the US representative said: “Militarism inevitably leads to a cynical and malicious disregard for the rights of others, the foundations of civilization. Militarism destroys the moral foundations of the people who practice it, and since it can only be defeated by the force of its own weapons, it undermines the morality of the peoples who are forced to fight it. " In confirmation of the idea of ​​the corrupting effect of Nazism on the minds and morals of ordinary Germans, soldiers and officers of the Wehrmacht, one, but very characteristic example, can be cited. In document No. 162, presented to the USSR International Court, the captured German Chief Corporal Lecourt admitted in his testimony that he personally shot and tortured 1200 Soviet prisoners of war and civilians in the period from September 1941 to October 1942 , for which he received the next title ahead of schedule and was awarded the "Eastern Medal". The worst thing is that he did not commit these atrocities by order of higher commanders, but, in his own words, "in his free time from work, for the sake of interest", "for his own pleasure." Isn't this the best proof of the guilt of the Nazi leaders towards their people!

American soldier, professional executioner John Woods prepares a noose for criminals

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE NURNBERG PROCESS

Today, 70 years after the beginning of the Nuremberg trials (70 years from the date of its completion in the fall of next year), it is clearly visible what a huge role it played in the historical, legal and socio-political plans. The Nuremberg trials became a historical event, first of all, as the triumph of the Law before the Nazi lawlessness. He exposed the misanthropic essence of German Nazism, its plans to destroy entire states and peoples, its transcendent inhumanity and cruelty, absolute immorality, the true dimensions and depth of the atrocities of the Nazi executioners and the extreme danger of Nazism and fascism for all mankind. The entire totalitarian system of Nazism as a whole was subjected to moral condemnation. Thus, a moral and ethical barrier was created for the revival of Nazism in the future, or, at least, for its general condemnation.

We must not forget that the entire civilized world, which has just got rid of the "brown plague", applauded the verdict of the International Military Tribunal. It is a pity that now in some European countries, in one form or another, there is a revival of Nazism, and in the Baltic states and in Ukraine, the process of glorification and glorification of the members of the Waffen-SS detachments, which during the Nuremberg trials were recognized as criminal along with German security detachments, is actively underway. SS. It is important that these phenomena of today are harshly condemned by all peace-loving peoples and such authoritative international and regional security organizations as the UN, OSCE and the European Union. I would not like to believe that we are witnessing what one of the Nazi criminals, G. Fritsche, predicted in his speech at the Nuremberg Trials: “If you think that this is the end, then you are mistaken. We are witnessing the birth of the Hitler legend. "

It is important to know and remember that no one canceled the decisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal! It seems completely unacceptable to radically revise its decisions and, in general, its historical significance, as well as the main results and lessons of World War II, which, unfortunately, some Western historians, legal scholars and politicians are trying to do today. It is important to note that the materials of the Nuremberg Trials are one of the most important sources for studying the history of World War II and creating a holistic and objective picture of the atrocities of the Nazi leaders, as well as for obtaining an unambiguous answer to the question of who is to blame for unleashing this monstrous war. In Nuremberg, it was Nazi Germany, its political, party and military leaders who were recognized as the main and only perpetrators of international aggression. Therefore, the attempts of some modern historians to share this blame equally between Germany and the USSR are completely untenable.

From the point of view of legal significance, the Nuremberg Trials became an important milestone in the development of international law. The Charter of the International Military Tribunal and the verdict passed almost 70 years ago have become "one of the cornerstones of modern international law, one of its basic principles," wrote a well-known Russian researcher of various issues and aspects of the Nuremberg Trials, Professor A.I. Poltorak in his work “The Nuremberg Trials. Basic legal problems ”. His point of view is of particular importance also because he was the secretary of the USSR delegation in this process.

It should be admitted that among some lawyers there is an opinion that not everything was smooth in the organization and conduct of the Nuremberg trial from the point of view of legal norms, but it must be borne in mind that it was the first international court of this kind. However, not a single strictest lawyer who understands this will ever argue that Nuremberg did nothing progressive and significant for the development of international law. And it is completely unacceptable for politicians to interpret the legal intricacies of the process, claiming at the same time to express the ultimate truth.

The Nuremberg Trials became the first event of this kind and significance in history. He defined new types of international crimes, which then became firmly established in international law and the national legislation of many states. In addition to the fact that in Nuremberg the aggression was recognized as a crime against peace (for the first time in history!), The officials responsible for planning, preparing and unleashing aggressive wars were also brought to justice for the first time. For the first time, it was recognized that the position of the head of state, department or army, as well as the execution of government orders or a criminal order does not exempt from criminal liability. The Nuremberg decisions led to the creation of a special branch in international law - international criminal law.

Following the Nuremberg Trials, the Tokyo Trial, a trial of major Japanese war criminals, took place in Tokyo from May 3, 1946 to November 12, 1948, at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. The demand for the trial of Japanese war criminals was formulated in the Potsdam Declaration of July 26, 1945. The Japan Surrender Act of September 2, 1945 pledged to "honestly comply with the terms of the Potsdam Declaration," including the punishment of war criminals.

The Nuremberg Principles, approved by the UN General Assembly (resolutions of December 11, 1946 and November 27, 1947), have become universally recognized norms of international law. They serve as the basis for refusal to carry out a criminal order and warn of the responsibility of those leaders of states who are ready to commit crimes against peace and humanity. Later, crimes against humanity included genocide, racism and racial discrimination, apartheid, the use of nuclear weapons, and colonialism. The principles and norms formulated by the Nuremberg Trials formed the basis of all post-war international legal documents aimed at preventing aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity (for example, the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Geneva Convention 1949 (d. "On the Protection of Victims of War", 1968 Convention "On the Inapplicability of the Statute of Limitation to War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity", Rome Statute 1998 "On the Establishment of the International Criminal Court").

The Nuremberg Trials set a legal precedent for the establishment of such international tribunals. In the 1990s, the Nuremberg Military Tribunal became the prototype for the creation of the International Tribunal for Rwanda and the International Tribunal for Yugoslavia, established by the UN Security Council. True, as it turned out, they do not always pursue fair goals and are not always completely impartial and objective. This was especially evident in the work of the Tribunal for Yugoslavia.

In 2002, at the request of the President of Sierra Leone, Ahmed Kabbah, who turned to the UN Secretary General, a Special Court for Sierra Leone was established under the auspices of this authoritative organization. He was to conduct an international trial of those responsible for the most serious crimes (mainly military and against humanity) in the internal armed conflict in Sierra Leone.

Unfortunately, when establishing (or, on the contrary, deliberately not establishing) international tribunals like the Nuremberg tribunals, nowadays there are often "double standards" and the decisive factor is not the desire to find the true culprits of crimes against peace and humanity, but in a certain way to demonstrate their political influence on the international stage, show who is who. This, for example, happened during the work of the International Tribunal for Yugoslavia. To prevent this from happening in the future, the political will and cohesion of the UN member states is required.

The political significance of the Nuremberg trials is also obvious. He initiated the process of demilitarization and denazification of Germany, i.e. the implementation of the most important decisions made in 1945 at the Yalta (Crimean) and Potsdam conferences. As you know, in order to eradicate fascism, destroy the Nazi system of statehood, liquidate the German armed forces and military industry, Berlin and the country's territory were divided into zones of occupation, in which the victorious states exercised administrative power. We note with regret that our Western allies, disdaining the agreed decisions, were the first to take steps to revive the defense industry, armed forces and the creation of the FRG in their zone of occupation, and with the emergence of the military-political NATO bloc and the admission of West Germany to it.

But, assessing the post-war socio-political significance of Nuremberg, we emphasize that never before has the judicial process united all the progressive forces of the world, striving once and for all to condemn not only specific war criminals, but also the very idea of ​​achieving foreign policy and economic goals with the help of aggression against other countries and peoples. Supporters of peace and democracy regarded it as an important step towards the practical implementation of the Yalta agreements of 1945 to establish a new post-war order in Europe and throughout the world, which was to be based, on the one hand, on a complete and general rejection of aggressive military methods. in international politics, and on the other, on mutual understanding and friendly all-round cooperation and collective efforts of all peace-loving countries, regardless of their socio-political and economic structure. The possibility of such cooperation and its fruitfulness was clearly proved during the Second World War, when most of the states of the world, realizing the mortal danger of the "brown plague", united in the Anti-Hitler coalition and by joint efforts overcame it. The creation in 1945 of the world security organization - the UN - was further proof of this. Unfortunately, with the beginning of the Cold War, the development of this progressive process - towards rapprochement and cooperation of states with different socio-political systems - turned out to be significantly hampered and did not go the way it was thought at the end of World War II.

It is important that the Nuremberg Trials always stand in the way of the revival of Nazism and aggression as a state policy in our day and in the future. Its results and historical lessons, which cannot be forgotten, let alone revision and reassessment, should serve as a warning to everyone who sees themselves as the elected "rulers of the destinies" of states and peoples. This requires only the desire and will to unite the efforts of all freedom-loving, democratic forces of the world, their union, such as the states of the Anti-Hitler coalition managed to create during the Second World War.

Shepova N.Ya.,
Candidate of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor, Senior Research Fellow
Research Institute (Military History)
Military Academy of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces

Erich Koch is a prominent figure in the NSDAP and the Third Reich. Gauleiter (October 1, 1928 - May 8, 1945) and Chief President (September 1933 - May 8, 1945) of East Prussia, Head of the Civil Administration of the Bialystok District (August 1, 1941-1945), Reich Commissioner of Ukraine (1 September 1941 - November 10, 1944), SA Obergruppenfuehrer (1938), war criminal.

Adolf Eichmann is a German officer, a member of the Gestapo, directly responsible for the mass extermination of Jews during the Second World War. By order of Reinhard Heydrich, he took part in the work of the Wannsee Conference on January 20, 1942, at which measures were discussed for the "final solution of the Jewish question" - the extermination of several million Jews. As a secretary, he kept the minutes of the meeting. Eichmann proposed to immediately resolve the issue of the expulsion of Jews to Eastern Europe. The direct management of this operation was entrusted to him.

He was in a privileged position in the Gestapo, often receiving orders directly from Himmler, bypassing the immediate superiors G. Müller and E. Kaltenbrunner. In March 1944, he headed the Sonderkommando, which organized the dispatch from Budapest to Auschwitz of transport with Hungarian Jews. In August 1944 he presented a report to Himmler, in which he reported on the extermination of 4 million Jews.

The initial list of the accused included:

1. Hermann Wilhelm Goering, Reichsmarschall, Commander-in-Chief of the German Air Force.

2. Rudolf Hess, Hitler's deputy in charge of the Nazi Party.

3. Joachim von Ribbentrop, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Nazi Germany.

4. Robert Leigh, head of the Labor Front.

5. Wilhelm Keitel, Chief of Staff of the Supreme Command of the German Armed Forces.

6. Ernst Kaltenbrunner, head of the RSHA.

7. Alfred Rosenberg, one of the main ideologues of Nazism, Reich Minister for Eastern Territories.

8. Hans Frank, head of the occupied Polish lands.

9. Wilhelm Frick, Minister of the Interior of the Reich.

10. Julius Streicher, Gauleiter, editor-in-chief of the anti-Semitic newspaper Sturmovik.

11. Hjalmar Schacht, Reich Minister of Economy before the war.

12. Walter Funk, Minister of Economics after Schacht.

13. Gustav Krupp von Bohlen und Galbach, head of the Friedrich Krupp concern.

14. Karl Doenitz, Fleet Admiral of the Third Reich.

15. Erich Raeder, Commander-in-Chief of the Navy.

16. Baldur von Schirach, head of the Hitler Youth, Gauleiter of Vienna.

17. Fritz Sauckel, head of forced deportations to the Reich of labor from the occupied territories.

18. Alfred Jodl, chief of staff of the OKW operational leadership.

19. Franz von Papen, German Chancellor to Hitler, then Ambassador to Austria and Turkey.

20. Arthur Seyss-Inquart, Chancellor of Austria, then Imperial Commissioner of the occupied Holland.

21. Albert Speer, Reich Minister of Armaments.

22. Konstantin von Neurath, in the early years of Hitler's reign, minister of foreign affairs, then governor in the protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia.

23. Hans Fritsche, head of the press and broadcasting department at the Ministry of Propaganda.

Groups or organizations to which the defendants belonged were also accused.

The defendants were charged with planning, preparing, unleashing or waging an aggressive war in order to establish the world domination of German imperialism, i.e. in crimes against peace; in the murder and torture of prisoners of war and civilians of the occupied countries, the deportation of civilians to Germany for forced labor, the killing of hostages, the plundering of public and private property, the aimless destruction of cities and villages, in ruin not justified by military necessity, i.e. in war crimes; in the extermination, enslavement, exile and other atrocities committed against the civilian population for political, racial or religious reasons, i.e. in crimes against humanity.

The question was also raised of recognizing as criminal such organizations of fascist Germany as the leadership of the National Socialist Party, the assault (SA) and security detachments of the National Socialist Party (SS), the security service (SD), the state secret police (Gestapo), the government cabinet and the general staff.

October 18, 1945 the indictment was received by the International Military Tribunal and, a month before the start of the trial, was served on each of the accused in German.

On November 25, 1945, after reading the indictment, Robert Leigh committed suicide, and Gustav Krupp was declared terminally ill by the medical commission, and the case against him was dismissed pending trial.

The rest of the accused were brought to trial.

In accordance with the London Agreement, the International Military Tribunal was formed on an equal footing from representatives of the four countries. Lord Jeffrey Lawrence, the representative of Great Britain, was appointed Chief Justice. From other countries, the members of the tribunal were approved:

From the USSR: Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Soviet Union, Major General of Justice Iona Nikitchenko;

For the United States: Former Attorney General of the Country Francis Biddle;

From France: Criminal Law Professor Henri Donnedier de Vabre.

Each of the four countries sent their chief prosecutors, deputies and aides to the trial:

From the USSR: Prosecutor General of the Ukrainian SSR Roman Rudenko;

For the United States: Federal Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson;

From UK: Hartley Shawcross;

From France: François de Menton, who was absent in the early days of the trial and was replaced by Charles Dubost, and then Champentier de Ribes was appointed in place of de Menton.

During the process, 403 open court sessions were held, 116 witnesses were questioned, numerous written testimonies and documentary evidence were considered (mainly official documents from German ministries and departments, the General Staff, military concerns and banks).

Due to the unprecedented severity of the crimes committed by the defendants, doubts arose as to whether to observe democratic norms of legal proceedings in relation to them. For example, representatives of the prosecution from Great Britain and the United States suggested not to give the defendants the last word. However, the French and Soviet sides insisted on the opposite.

The trial was tense not only because of the unusualness of the tribunal itself and the charges brought against the defendants. The post-war exacerbation of relations between the USSR and the West after the famous Fulton speech by Churchill also affected, and the defendants, sensing the prevailing political situation, skillfully dragged on for time and hoped to get away from the well-deserved punishment. In such a difficult situation, the tough and professional actions of the Soviet prosecution played a key role. The film about concentration camps, shot by front-line cameramen, finally turned the tide of the process. The terrible pictures of Majdanek, Sachsenhausen, Auschwitz completely removed the doubts of the tribunal.

The International Military Tribunal sentenced:

To death by hanging: Goering, Ribbentrop, Keitel, Kaltenbrunner, Rosenberg, Frank, Frick, Streicher, Sauckel, Seyss-Inquart, Bormann (in absentia), Jodl (was acquitted posthumously during the review of the case by the Munich court in 1953).

To life imprisonment: Hessa, Funka, Raeder.

By 20 years in prison: Shirakh, Speer.

By 15 years in prison: Neurath.

By 10 years in prison: Denitsa.

Justified by: Fritsche, Papen, Schacht.

The tribunal recognized the organizations of the SS, SD, SA, Gestapo and the leadership of the Nazi party as criminal and did not recognize the government cabinet of Nazi Germany, the General Staff and the High Command of the Wehrmacht as such. A member of the Tribunal from the USSR stated in a dissenting opinion about his disagreement with the decision not to recognize these organizations as criminal, with the acquittal of Schacht, Papen, Fritsche and the not deservedly mild sentence to Hess.

(Military encyclopedia. Chairman of the Main Editorial Commission S. Ivanov. Military Publishing House. Moscow. In 8 volumes -2004)

Most of the convicts filed petitions for clemency; Raeder - on the replacement of life imprisonment with the death penalty; Goering, Jodl and Keitel - about replacing the hanging with execution if the request for clemency is not granted. All of these motions were rejected.

Death Penalties Have Been Enforced on the night of October 16, 1946 in the building of the Nuremberg prison. Goering was poisoned in prison shortly before his execution.

The sentence was carried out by US Sergeant John Wood.

Funk and Raeder, sentenced to life imprisonment, were pardoned in 1957. After Speer and Schirach were released in 1966, only Hess remained in prison. The right-wing forces of Germany repeatedly demanded that he be pardoned, but the victorious powers refused to commute the sentence. On 17 August 1987, Hess was found hanged in his cell.

The Nuremberg Tribunal, having created a precedent for the jurisdiction of the highest government officials to an international court, refuted the medieval principle "Kings are subject only to God." It was with the Nuremberg Trials that the history of international criminal law began.

The principles of international law contained in the Charter of the tribunal and expressed in the verdict were confirmed by the resolution of the UN General Assembly of December 11, 1946.

The Nuremberg trials legalized the final defeat of fascism.

The material was prepared on the basis of information from open sources

Not everyone who appeared before the tribunal received the same sentence. Of the 24 people, six were found guilty on all four counts. For example, Franz Papen, ambassador to Austria and then to Turkey, was released in the courtroom, although the Soviet side insisted on his guilt. In 1947, he received a sentence, which was then softened. The Nazi criminal ended his years ... in a castle, but far from a prison. And he continued to bend the line of his party, releasing "Memoirs of a Political Leader of Hitlerite Germany. 1933-1947 ", where he spoke about the correctness and consistency of German policy in the 1930s:" I made many mistakes in my life and more than once came to false conclusions. However, I owe it to my own family to correct at least some of my most offensive distortions of reality. The facts, when examined impartially, recreate a completely different picture. Nevertheless, this is not my main task. At the end of my life, which stretched over three generations, I am most concerned with promoting a greater understanding of the role of Germany in the events of this period. "

The Nuremberg Trials (International Military Tribunal) is the trial of the leaders of Nazi Germany following the results of the Second World War. The process took place from November 20, 1945 to October 1, 1946, 10 months. Within the framework of the international tribunal, the victorious countries (USSR, USA, England and France) accused the leaders of Nazi Germany for war and other crimes committed by the latter from 1939 to 1945.

➤ ➤ ➤ ➤ ➤ ➤

Creation of an international tribunal

The International Tribunal for the Trial of German War Criminals was formed on 8 August 1945 in London. There were signed Agreements between the USSR, USA, Great Britain and France. The agreement was based on the principles of the United Nations (United Nations) and the parties have repeatedly stressed this, including in the Agreement itself.

1. The tribunal will be held in Germany.
2. The organization, jurisdiction and functions are separately created for the tribunal.
3. Each country undertakes to bring before the tribunal all important war criminals in their captivity.
4. The signed agreements do not cancel the 1943 Moscow Declaration. Let me remind you that according to the declaration of 1943, all war criminals were to be returned to those settlements where they committed their atrocities, and there they were to be tried.
5. Any UN member can join the prosecution.
6. The agreement does not override other ships that have already been created or will be created in the future.
7. The agreement comes into force from the moment of signing and valid for 1 year.

It was on this basis that the Nuremberg Trials were created.

Preparing for the process

Before the start of the Nuremberg Trials, 2 meetings were held in Berlin, at which organizational issues were discussed. The first meeting took place on October 9 in the building of the Control Council in Berlin. Minor issues were raised here - the uniform of the judges, the organization of translation into 4 languages, the format of the defense, and so on. The second meeting took place on October 18 in the same building of the Control Council. This meeting, unlike the first one, was open.

The International Military Tribunal in Berlin was convened to issue an indictment. So announced the chairman of the meeting, Major General of Justice I.T. Nikitchenko. The indictment was directed against the high command of the Wehrmacht, as well as against the organizations under its control: the government, the party leadership, security detachments of the SS party, the security service of the SD party, the Gestapo (secret police), assault detachments of the SA party, the general staff and the high command of the German army. The charges were brought against the following persons: Goering, Hess, Ribbentrop, Lei, Keitel, Kaltenbrunner, Funk, Schacht, Rosenberg, Frank, Frick, Streicher, Krupp, Bohlen, Galbach, Doenitz, Raeder, Schirach, Sauckel, Jodl, Bormann, Papen, Seis-Inkvrt, Speer, Neurath and Fritsche.

The accusations of the Nuremberg Tribunal consisted of 4 main points:

1. Conspiracy to seize power in Germany.
2. War crimes.
3. Crimes against humanity.

Each of the charges is extensive and must be dealt with separately.

Conspiracy to seize power

The accused were accused of the fact that they were all members of the National Socialist Party, participated in a conspiracy to seize power, realizing the consequences to which this would lead.

The party created 4 postulates that became the basis of the conspiracy. These postulates made it possible to control the entire German public by means of imposing doctrine on them - the superiority of the German race (Aryans), the need for war for justice, the full power of the "Fuhrer" as the only person worthy to rule Germany. It is on these doctrines that Germany grew up, which for 6 years kept Europe at the stage of war.

Further accusations of this point relate to the establishment of total control over all spheres of life of the German state, with the help of which military aggression became possible.

These crimes are associated with the outbreak of wars:

• September 1, 1939 - against Poland
• September 3, 1939 - against France and Great Britain
• April 9, 1940 - against Denmark and Norway
• May 10, 1940 - against the Benelux countries
• April 6, 1941 - against Greece and Yugoslavia
• April 22, 1941 - against the USSR
• December 11, 1941 - against the USA

Attention is drawn to the following nuance. Above are 7 dates on which the international tribunal accused Germany of starting wars. There are no questions about 5 of them - these days wars against these states really began, but which wars were started on September 3, 1939 and December 11, 1941? On what sector of the front did the German military command (which was tried in Nuremberg) start the war on September 3, 1939 against England and France, and on December 11, 1941 against the United States? Here we are dealing with the substitution of concepts. In fact, Germany unleashed a war with Poland, for which on September 3, 1939 England and France declared war on her. And on December 11, 1941, the United States declares war on Germany after the latter had already fought with a huge number of countries (including the USSR) and after Pearl Harbar, which was perpetrated by the Japanese, not the Germans.

War crimes

The leadership of Nazi Germany was charged with the following war crimes:

• Murder and ill-treatment of civilians. It is enough to cite only the figures that according to the indictment in the USSR alone, this crime by Germany affected about 3 million people.
• The hijacking of the civilian population into slavery. The indictment refers to 5 million citizens of the USSR, 750 thousand citizens of Czechoslovakia, about 1.5 million French, 500 thousand Dutch, 190 thousand Belgians, 6 thousand Luxembourgers, 5.2 thousand Danes.
• Murder and cruel treatment of prisoners of war.
• Hostage killing. We are talking about thousands of those killed.
• Imposition of collective fines. This system was used by Germany in many countries, but not in the USSR. Collective liability involved the payment of a fine by the entire population for the actions of individuals. It would seem not the most important article of the charge, but over the years of the war, collective fines were issued in the amount of more than 1.1 trillion francs.
• Theft of private and public property. The statement of the Nuremberg Tribunal says that as a result of the embezzlement of private and public property, the damage to France amounted to 632 trillion francs, Belgium - 175 billion Belgian francs, the USSR - 679 trillion rubles, Czechoslovakia - 200 trillion Czechoslovak crowns.
• Aimless destruction not motivated by military necessity. It is about the destruction of cities, villages, settlements and so on.
• Forced recruitment of labor. First of all, among the civilian population. For example, during the period from 1942 to 1944 in France, 963 thousand people were forcibly converted to work in Germany. Another 637 thousand French worked for the German army in France. Data on other countries in the charge were not specified. It speaks only of the huge number of prisoners in the USSR.
• Compulsion to swear allegiance to a foreign state.

The accused and the charges

The participants were accused of facilitating the rise to power of the Nazis, strengthening their order in Germany, preparing for war, war crimes, crimes against humanity, including crimes against individuals. This is what everyone was accused of. Each of them had their own additional charges. They are presented in the table below.

Defendants at the Nuremberg Trials

Accused	Position	Charge *
Goering Hermann Wilhelm	Party member since 1922, head of the SA troops, general of the SS, commanders-in-chief of the air force
Von Ribbentrop Joachim	Party member since 1932, Minister of Foreign Policy, General of the SS troops	Active participation in preparation for war and war crimes.
Hess Rudolph	Party member 1921-1941, Deputy Fuhrer, General of the SA and SS troops	Active participation in preparation for war and war crimes. Creation of foreign policy plans.
Kaltenbrunner Ernst	Party member since 1932, police general, head of the Austrian police	Strengthening the power of the Nazis in Austria. Establishment of concentration camps
Rosenberg Alfred	Party member since 1920, party leader for ideology and foreign policy, minister of the occupied eastern territories	Psychological preparation for war. Numerous crimes against individuals.
Frank Hans	Party member since 1932, Governor-General of the occupied Polish lands.	Crimes against humanity and war crimes in the occupied territories.
Bormann Martin	Party member since 1925, secretary of the Fuhrer, head of the party office, member of the Council of Ministers for State Defense.	Charged on all counts.
Frick Wilhelm	Party member since 1922, director of the center for the annexation of the occupied territories, the protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia.	Charged on all counts.
Leigh Robert	Party member since 1932, organizer of the inspection for the supervision of foreign workers.	The criminal use of human labor to wage an aggressive war.
Sauckel Fritz	Party member since 1921, governor of Thuringia, organizer of the inspection for the supervision of foreign workers.	Forcing the inhabitants of occupied countries to slave labor in Germany.
Speer Albert	Party member since 1932, Commissioner General for Armaments.	Promoting the exploitation of human labor for the conduct of war.
Funk Walter	Party member since 1932, economic adviser to Hitler, secretary of the propaganda ministry, minister of economics.	Economic exploitation of the occupied territories.
Mine Helmar	Party member since 1932, Minister of Economics, President of the German Bank.	Development of economic plans for the conduct of war.
Von Papen Franz	Party member since 1932, Vice-Chancellor under Hitler.	He was not charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Krupp Gustav	Party member since 1932, member of the Economic Council, President of the Association of German Industrialists.	The use of people from the occupied territories at work for the conduct of war.
Von Neurath Constantine	Party member since 1932, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia.	Implementation of foreign policy plans to prepare for war. Active participation in crimes against persons and property in the occupied territories.
Von Schirach Baldur	Party member since 1924, minister of youth education, head of Hitler's youth (Hitler Youth), Gauleiter of Vienna.	Promotion of psychological and educational training of organizations for the conduct of war. Not charged with war crimes.
Zeiss-Inquart Arthur	Party member since 1932, Minister of Security of Austria, Deputy Governor-General of Polish Territories, Commissioner of the Netherlands.	Strengthening power over Austria.
Streicher Julius	Party member since 1932, Gauleiter of Franconia, editor of the anti-Semitic newspaper Der Sturme.	Responsibility for the persecution of Jews. Not charged with war crimes.
Keitel Wilhelm	Party member since 1938, Chief of the High Command of the German Armed Forces.	Cruel treatment of prisoners of war and civilians. He is not accused of the Nazis coming to power.
Jodl Alfred	Party member since 1932, head of the army operations department, chief of staff of the high command of the German armed forces.	Charged on all counts.
Raeder Erich	Party member since 1928, commander-in-chief of the German navy.	War crimes related to naval warfare.
Doenitz Karl	Party member since 1932, Commander-in-Chief of the German Navy, Advisor to Hitler.	Crime against persons and property on the high seas. The Nazis were not accused of the rise of power.
Fritsche Hans	Party member since 1933, head of the radio service, director of the Ministry of Propaganda.	Exploitation of the occupied territories, anti-Jewish measures.

* - In addition to the above.

This is a complete list according to which the Nuremberg trials blamed the elite of Nazi Germany.

Martin Bormann's case was heard in absentia. Krupp, recognized as a patient, could not be delivered to the hall, as a result of which the case was suspended. Lei committed suicide on October 26, 1945 - the case was closed due to the death of the suspect.

At the interview of the defendants on November 20, 1945, everyone pleaded not guilty, saying approximately the following words "I do not plead guilty in the sense that the charge was brought." A very ambiguous answer ... But the best answer to the question of guilt was Rudolf Hess, who said - I plead guilty before God.

Judges

The Nuremberg Trials had the following composition of judges:

• From the USSR - Nikitchenko Ion Timofeevich, his deputy - Volchkov Alexander Fedorovich.
• From the USA - Francis Biddle, his deputy - John Parker.
• From the United Kingdom - Jeffrey Lawrence, his deputy - Norman Birkett.
• For the French Republic - Henri Donnedier de Vabre, his deputy - Robert Falco.

Sentence

The Nuremberg Tribunal was concluded with a verdict on October 1, 1946. According to the verdict, 11 people will be hanged, 6 will go to jail and 3 will be acquitted.

The verdict of the Nuremberg Tribunal

Sentenced to death by hanging	Sentenced to jail	Found innocent
Goering Hermann Wilhelm	Rudolf Hess	Von Papen Franz
Joachim von Ribbentrop	Speer Albert	Mine Helmar
Streicher Julius	Doenitz Karl	Fritsche Hans
Keitel Wilhelm	Funk Walter
Rosenberg Alfred	Von Neurath Constantine
Kaltenbrunner Ernst	Raeder Erich
Frank Hans
Frick Wilhelm
Sauckel Fritz
Von Schirach Baldur
Zeiss-Inquart Arthur
Jodl Alfred

Double process standards

I propose to turn off emotions (this is difficult, but necessary) and think about this - Germany was judged by the USA, USSR, England and France. The list of charges was higher in the text. But the real problem was that the tribunal used double standards - what the Allies accused Germany of, they did! Not everything, of course, but a lot. Examples of indictment:

• Poor treatment of prisoners of war. But the same France used German prisoners of war for forced labor. France treated the captured Germans so cruelly that the United States even took some of the prisoners from them and sent protests.
• Forced deportation of the civilian population. But in 1945, the United States and the USSR agreed to deport more than 10 million Germans from eastern and central Europe.
• Planning, unleashing and conducting an aggressive war. But in 1939 the USSR does the same with respect to Finland.
• Destruction of civilian objects (cities and villages). But on the account of England hundreds of bombings of peaceful cities in Germany with the use of vortex bombs to inflict maximum damage on buildings.
• Looting and economic losses. But we all remember the well-known "2 days to plunder", which all allied armies had.

This is the best way to highlight the ambiguity of standards. This is neither good nor bad. There was a war, and terrible things always happen in war. It's just that a situation developed in Nuremberg that completely refutes the system of international law: the winner is to condemn the defeated, and the sentences "guilty" were known in advance. In this case, everything is considered from one side.

Have everyone condemned

The Nuremberg trial today raises more questions than answers. One of the main questions - who was to be tried for cruelty and war? Before answering this question, I want to recall Keitel's last words at the Nuremberg Tribunal. He said that he was sorry that he, a soldier, was used for such purposes. And this is what the chairman of the court replied to.

An order from the command, even if it is given to a soldier, cannot and should not be blindly carried out if it requires the commission of such brutal and large-scale crimes without military necessity.

From the prosecutor's speech

It turns out that any person who carried out criminal orders had to appear before an international court. But then it must be German generals, officers and soldiers, an employee of concentration camps, doctors who conducted inhuman experiments on prisoners, generals of all countries that took part in the war against the USSR on the side of Germany and others. But no one judged them ... In this regard, there are 2 questions:

• Why weren't Germany's allies Italy and Japan attached to the trial?
• Troops and generals from the following countries took part in the campaign against the USSR: Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Austria, Denmark, Holland, Belgium. Why were the representatives of these countries and the military who took part in the war not convicted?

Undoubtedly, representatives of both categories cannot be convicted for the Nazis coming to power in Germany, but they should be convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity. After all, it was precisely for this that the Nuremberg trials blamed the German army, which included the armies of the countries indicated above.

What was the process for?

The Nuremberg trial today raises a huge number of questions, the main of which is why this trial was needed at all? Historians answer - for the triumph of justice, so that all those guilty of the world war and those who have blood on their hands should be punished. A beautiful phrase, but very easy to refute. If the allies were looking for justice, then not only the top of Germany, but also Italy, Japan, the generals of Romania, Austria, Hungary, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Denmark and other countries that took an active part in the German European war should have been tried in Nuremberg ...

Let me give you an example with Moldova, which was on the border, and which was hit in the early days of the war. The Germans attacked here, but they very quickly began to move inland, followed by the Romanian army. And when they talk about the atrocities of the Germans in Moldova during the war, then 90% of these are atrocities of the Romanians, who organized the genocide of the Moldovans. Shouldn't these people be held accountable for their crimes?

I see only 2 reasonable explanations why the international tribunal over Germany took place:

1. One country was needed on which to hang all the sins of the war. Burning Germany was the best fit for this.
2. It was necessary to shift the blame onto specific people. These people were found - the leadership of Nazi Germany. It turned out to be a paradox. For a 6-year world war with tens of millions of deaths, 10-15 people are to blame. Of course, it was not so ...

The Nuremberg Trials summed up the Second World War. He identified the perpetrators and the degree of their guilt. On this, the page of history was turned, and no one seriously dealt with the issues of how Hitler came to power, how he reached the borders of Poland without a single shot, and others.

After all, neither before, nor after that, a tribunal was never arranged over the vanquished.

France is the winner country

The Nuremberg trials recorded that 4 countries won the war: the USSR, the USA, England and France. It was these 4 countries that judged Germany. If there are no questions about the USSR, the USA and England, then there are questions about France. Can it be called a victorious country? If a country wins a war, then it must have victories. For 4 years the USSR passes from Moscow to Berlin, England helps the USSR, fights at sea and arranges bombing of the enemy, the United States is known for Normandy, but what does France have?

In 1940, Hitler quite easily defeats her army, after which he arranges the famous dance near the Eiffel Tower. After that, the French begin to work for the Wehrmacht, including militarily. But something else is most revealing. After the end of the war, 2 conferences were held (Crimean and Berlin), at which the winners discussed post-war life and the fate of Germany. There were only 3 countries at both conferences: USSR, USA and England.