http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/ronrosenbaum/2007/11/20/devastating_new_revelation_of.php [rquoter]Devastating New Revelation of Holocaust Warning and Missed Opportunity My friend and former colleague Craig S. Karpel often e-mails me eye-opening links to stories that don’t get the attention they deserve. This piece from the Jerusalem Post is an example, a true shocker: it’s about a new book published in Hebrew that reveals that an explicit warning of Hitler’s plan for exterminationist death camps for Jews was passed on to British officials, perhaps even Churchill himself, in the spring of 1942, months before what had been previously regarded as the first explicit report of the industrialized mass murder the one that came in August of ‘42. But to my mind even more important than the timing is what the book reveals accompanied the warning: a proposed practical course of action that might—who knows now?— have made a difference in forestalling it. The book—Pazner: The Man Who Knew—tells the story of Chaim Pazner an official of the Jewish Agency’s Palestine Office in Switzerland who was approached by a Swiss friend who wanted to pass on an explicit message from a German officer who made clear the gravity and urgency of the message: “In the East, there are camps being prepared which will be used to destroy all the Jews of Europe and many of the Soviet war prisoners by gas,” the message read. “Please pass this message on immediately to Churchill and Roosevelt personally.” But what makes this story even more devastating than the fact that it, like other such warnings resulted in no effective action, was the second half of the message: “If the BBC broadcasts a daily warning to the Germans not to operate the gas chambers maybe they will not operate them, because the criminals are doing everything they can to prevent the German people from finding out what they are planning to do and it is clear that they will also do this.” Here we get into one of the most controversial areas of Holocaust history: what could the Allies had done if they’d listened to the warnings and not largely dismissed them? Most of the debate has surrounded the question of whether they should have bombed Auschwitz or the railway tracks to the death camp. There are those who say yes, definitely, it would have saved lives, and there are those who say that the best way to save the most lives was to focus on winning the war more quickly and that the information about the camps and accessibility of them to bombing raids was not certain. But this BBC idea is startling and new to me and has a certain plausibility. According to the book the warning was passed on to the BBC and to Churchill himself although the evidence on the latter is less strong. And of course, as we know, nothing was done. Would it have made a difference if the advice to the BBC had been followed? From my reading of the situation in the course of writing Explaining Hitler (see left column), it’s true that Hitler had wanted to keep the death camps secret from the Allies because he feared (unnecessarily, alas) that such knowledge would provoke a fierce reaction. On the other hand the evidence is less clear that the Final Solution was unknown to the German people. Yes, there is a well-known Himmler speech to the SS in which he celebrates their secret participation in the slaughter. But there is also evidence that German soldiers and civilian administrators knew very well what was going on. And Hitler had repeatedly made clear his goal of the destruction of the European jews in public speeches. But the fact that the process was actually going on in death camps in Poland (mainly) was not widely advertised in Germany. Which doesn’t mean the German people didn’t know. I recall being on some panel with an official of the German consulate here who cited a poll showing that German civilians didn’t know and asking him: what did they think happened to all the Jews of Germany who disappeared from the cities and towns. Did the German people think they’d all decided to take a vacation? Of course a poll would elicit a “we didn’t know” response. And of course it’s an open question whether, if they knew, they’d care. Still the idea of BBC broadcasts that might have warned any Germans who participated in the extermination process that they would be prosecuted as war criminals, broadcasts that left no doubt in the mind of every single German, every single European (since most European nations were complicit in the execution of the Holocaust) that they would be held accountable. Even if they weren’t, the fear of it might have had some effect, the putative broadcasts might have made a difference. And—who knows—the widespread broadcast of the on gong mass murder might have given more impetus to those few German officers and civilians wavering to go forward sooner with their plans to depose or assassinate Hitler. Or maybe I’m giving them too much credit for caring. Maybe it would have made no difference at all. We’ll never know. Still among all the stories of warnings ignored, or disbelieved, rescue action denied or delayed till too late, this struck me as a not-impossible lost chance. And a reminder that the time to stop a nation from committing genocide is before it starts not after it’s finished.[/rquoter]
Its an interesting piece that raises some important question. I think it was obvious to almost all Germans and most Europeans that something terrible was happening to the Jews. Whether people really understood the extent of what was happening might be debatable but I don't think the situation was that people were so ignorant as to not realize that Nazis were getting rid of the Jews. While having exact knowledge of the Holocaust might have given even greater moral impetus to the Allies I'm not sure how that would've changed the course of the war. There was no secret that the Nazis were anti-semitic and many in Germany and throughout Europe shared that view. While there were many Europeans who helped Jews there were many more who willingly sold out their Jewish neighbors. At the sametime the Allies were in an all out war with the Nazis and its questionable how much more they could've put into the war. While they might've shifted tactics and bombed Auschwitz given the dangers of bombing and the need to cripple the Axis war machine they might've chosen to concentrate on the targets they were bombing.
Yet another basso WWII themed post in favor of war. Who would have thunk it? Keep the fantasy alive, basso. BTW, there were Hollywood movies about Nazi death camps well before 1942. It wasn't like it was some secret idea.
Yeah, it's interesting to note that the 'Final Solution' didn't come until after Germany tried to deport Jews. Boatloads were turned away from every allied port. I agree.
Because basso has a long history of bringing up WWII as a launching point for positions advocating behavior with regards to the WoT, Iraq, or Iran. Based on history, it is unreasonable to think that this is not about Iran or Iraq or proactive behavior against 'Islamofascists'. This is an article about how the holocaust could have been prevented if the Allies were proactive and preemptive - do you really not see the launching point for a parallell discussion about Iran?
I'll take your word for it. I'm a part-timer in D&D, especially during the season, and haven't mastered everyone's tendencies here like you. I'll be quiet now.
It is. By 1942 there was already a war against Nazi Germany. I think the lesson would be that if we had foreknowledge it would be wrong to turn away all the refugees that were turned away from the various nations. It wouldn't be a preemptive strike if we were already in a war.
I think he is joking that I launched a preemptive strike on basso's arguments. I actually thought it was kinda funny.
you did, and i wasn't laying the ground work for an argument in favor of invading iran. i suppose one could make a case for invading darfur with the knowledge we currently have- indeed i've done so in the past, but that wasn't my intent. i found it a fascinating story, and if true, one wonders whether the message made it's way up to churchill/rooselvelt, and if it did, whether it was so "fantastic" that it wasn't believed. and even if it was believed, whether there was anything the allies could have legitimately done. i'm not sure about bombing the camps, or railways, but the radio messages seem like a low risk/high reward scenario. during the war, my old man was a kid in occupied denmark. the danes used small boats to ferry jews to neutral sweden (it's only a mile or so skaggerak). one night he was staying at a friend's house, and there was a knock on the door. the germans lined everybody up, went through the house and took the friend's father away. he died in bergen-belsen.
