The betrayal

Viac o knihe

At the end of World War II, the Allies confronted a significant challenge: how to punish those responsible for horrific crimes, necessitating the creation of terms like 'genocide' and 'crimes against humanity.' They also needed to address the fact that these atrocities were committed by Germany and to consider how to reform the German populace. The Allies responded by integrating historical reasoning into legal proceedings. The thirteen Nuremberg trials from 1945 to 1949 aimed to hold key perpetrators accountable while analyzing the Nazi regime and German history. Prosecutors traced Germany's deviation from a presumed Western developmental path, arguing that the moral collapse of a once-civilized nation was a collective failure rather than the result of a small criminal group. They highlighted how institutions such as private enterprise, academia, the military, and bureaucracy had been corrupted in Germany prior to Hitler's ascent. While the effectiveness of these arguments varied in court, they offered a compelling narrative that resonated during the ensuing Cold War: if Germany had strayed, it could still be reintegrated into the Western community. This comprehensive study of the Nuremberg trials also examines how historical context informs transitional justice in contemporary courtrooms, from Arusha to The Hague.