U.S. HOLOCAUST MUSEUM: 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE WANNSEE CONFER- ENCE

OVERSIGHT HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED SECOND CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON

U.S. HOLOCAUST MUSEUM: 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE WANNSEE CONFERENCE

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC FEBRUARY 5, 1992

Serial No. 102-21

Printed for the use of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 55-1991-- WASHINGTON : 1992

For sale bNh c U.S. (hicrnmcnt Printing )f ice Superinmclidcnt oIfDIIocuilni,. ('o1i 1ni'.\iiniI Sas Ollicc. \,',,,htlon. DC 204(2 ISBN 0-16-U38532-6

H44 1-5, COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES GEORGE MILLER, California, Chairman PHILIP R. SHARP, Indiana DON YOUNG, Alaska, EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts Ranking Republican Member AUSTIN J. MURPHY, Pennsylvania ROBERT J. LAGOMARSINO, California NICK JOE RAHALL II, West Virginia RON MARLENEE, Montana BRUCE F. VENTO, Minnesota JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah PAT WILLIAMS, Montana BARBARA F. VUCANOVICH, Nevada BEVERLY B. BYRON, Maryland BEN BLAZ, Guam RON DE LUGO, Virgin Islands JOHN J. RHODES III, Arizoni SAM GEJDENSON, Connecticut ELTON GALLEGLY, California PETER H. KOSTMAYER, Pennsylvania ROBERT F. SMITH, Oregon RICHARD H. LEHMAN, Cvlifornia - CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming BILL RICHARDSON, New Mexico JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee GEORGE (BUDDY) DARDEN, Georgia RICHARD T. SCHULZE, Pennsylvania MEL LEVINE, Californiv JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado WAYNE OWENS, Utah CHARLES H. TAYLOR, North Carolina JOHN LEWIS, Georgia JOHN T. DOOLITTLE, California BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado PETER A. DEFAZIO, Oregon RICHARD H. BAKER, Louisiana ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American Samoa TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York JIM JONTZ, Indiana PETER HOAGLAND, New England HARRY JOHNSTON, Florida LARRY LAROCCO, Idaho NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii CALVIN M. DOOLEY, California ANTONIO COLORADO, Puerto Rico DANIEL P. BEARD, Staff Director RICHARD MELTZER, General Counsel DAN VAL KISH, Republican Staff Director

SUBCOMMIrrEE ON ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT

PETER H. KOSTMAYER, Pennsylvania, Chairman PHILIP R. SHARP, Indiana JOHN J. RHODES III, Arizona EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts BEN GARRIDO BLAZ, Guam SAM GEJDENSON, Connecticut CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado AUSTIN J. MURPHY, Pennsylvania CHARLES H. TAYLOR, North Carolina BILL RICHARDSON, New Mexico JOHN T. DOOLITTLE, California GEORGE (BUDDY) DARDEN, Georgia WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado JIM JONTZ, Indiana DON YOUNG, Alaska RICHARD H. LEHMAN, California WAYNE OWENS, Utah GEORGE MILLER, California DAVID WEIss, Staff Director EMILY GRAY, Clerk CHRISTOPHER B. KEARNEY, Minority Counsel on Energy and the Environment CONTENTS

Page Hearing held: February 5, 1992 ...... 1

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1992 Statements: Panel consisting of: Edith Millman, Holocaust survivor ...... 3 Bjorn J. Gruenwald, Holocaust survivor ...... 14 Panel from the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council consisting of: Sara J. Bloomfield, executive director ...... 23 Sybil M ilton, resident historian ...... 46 Alvin Rosenfeld, research consultant ...... 52 Panel consisting of: Ruth Laibson, executive director, Interfaith Council on the Holocaust 63 Reinhard Wiemer, 2nd Secretary, Cultural Department, German Em- b assy ...... 69 Panel consisting of: Richard Breitman, historian, American University ...... 88 Gerald Feldman, historian, University of California at Berkeley ...... 97 Charles W. Sydnor, Jr., historian, Central Virginia Educational Tele- com m unications Corporation ...... 102

(1II) U.S. HOLOCAUST MUSEUM: 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE WANNSEE CONFERENCE

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1992

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. The subcommittee met at 1:30 p.m. in room 1324 of the Long- worth House Office Building, the Hon. Peter H. Kostmayer (chair- man of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. KOSTMAYER. The subcommittee will come to order. On January 20, 1942, in a villa in Wannsee, a quiet suburb of Berlin, a conference of senior government officials of Nazi Germa- ny was held to discuss the implementation of the state-sponsored systematic murder of an estimated 11 million European Jews. The Nazis called it "the final solution to the Jewish question." We call it the Holocaust. Although the plan to murder the Jews of Europe had been previously decided and was, in fact, already underway on a vast scale, it was apparently necessary to hold what we might call a cabinet-level meeting to make sure that all the various de- partments of the government understood their role in this gigantic and unprecedented undertaking. The historical significance of the Wannsee Confei ence, as it came to be known, is not one of public drama and display. Quite the con- trary, despite the grim subject, the minutes of the meeting show a typical interagency group discussing resettlement, natural decline, and final solution, as euphemisms for deportation, death from forced labor and starvation, and genocide itself. The Wannsee participants were -men of experience, education, and culture. Eight held Ph.Ds. In 90 minutes over cognac and a warm fire, they outlined the implementation of the murder of mil- lions of people. Because of their efficiency, the world is a different place. Our understanding of the nature of man has been irrevoca- bly altered by the Holocaust. But what the Wannsee Conference demonstrates most clearly and most chillingly is the potential of government for evil. It shows how men and women, both in and out of government, can shape and approve or acquiesce to the kind of agenda forged at Wannsee 50 years ago. What happened at Wannsee calls out for the atten- tion of every citizen in a democracy to what appears to be the rou.- tine business of government and for the involvement of every citi- zen 's moral sense in the choices that are made in the voting booth and on the floors of our legislatures. (1) - The 15 Wannsee officials bear responsibility for genocide. But so do the thousands of civil servants and other functionaries who im- plemented their orders. And so do the millions of Germans and other Europeans who discovered their neighbors gone in the morn- ing, who heard the trains packed with Jews moving-through their stations and who smelled the smoke of the crematoria. Even our own country cannot escape blame. While America fought Hitler and fascism and paid for its bravery and idealism with the lives of thousands of its sons and daughters far away from the battlefield, the judgment of history is harsh. How many victims might have been saved had we protested more forcefully or opened our doors more widely? Some think such unspeakable deeds can never be repeated. The -partnership of indifference and intolerance are, of course, still here. In Germany, some have a desire to face the truth about Nazism. Some don't. A recent poll revealed that 42 percent of Ger- mans believe the Nazis had their good side, 36 percent believe Jews have too much influence in the world, 32 percent believe Jews are partly responsible if they are hated and persecuted, and 64 percent do not feel free that they can express their true opinions of Jews. And even in the freest and most democratic country of them all, our own, David Duke stirs the fires of human hatred. This subcommittee, with jurisdiction over the U.S. Holocaust Me- morial Council, holds this hearing commemorating the 50th anni- versary of the Wannsee Conference to remind ourselves of the re- sponsibilities of this institution and this country in recalling those dark days and the world's abandonment not only of the Jews, but of the handicapped, Gypsies, homosexuals, communists, trade unionists, Jehovah's Witnesses, and others who for one reason or another offended the Nazis. As an American, as a non-Jew, and as a Congressman, I recall with special shame the failure then of a Congress with very few Jews to do more. On February 19, 1939, Senator Robert Wagner of New York and Representative Edith Rogers of Massachusetts intro- duced a bill in the Congress to allow 10,000 Jewish refugees chil- dren under age 14, from Europe, into the United States in 1939 and 1940. The Daughters of the American Revolution and the American Legion testified against the bill, which failed to get enough votes to get out of the subcommittee. Here is what one of the witnesses said. "Mr. Chairman, I am the daughter of generations of patriots. My forefathers helped to found this Republic. These refugees have a heritage of hate. They could never become loyal Americans." Three months later, on May 27, 1939, the SS St. Louis, a ship carrying nearly 1,000 European Jews, lingered in Havana harbor until being turned away. A few days later, after wandering aim- lessly, the SS St. Louis anchored 4 miles from Miami. The next day, on June 6, the ship was turned away by the U.S. immigration officials and told to return to Germany. Its passengers were finally given refuge in Great Britain and in Belgium and Holland, both of which were later overrun by the Nazis. On June 8, 1939, an 11-year-old girl who had read of the plight of those aboard the SS St. Louis wrote to Eleanor Roosevelt. In her letter she said: 3

Mother of our country, I am so sad the Jewish people have to suffer so. Please let them land in America. It hurts me so that I would give them my little bed if it was the last thing I had, because I am an American. Let us Americans not send them back to that slaughterhouse. We have three rooms that we do not use. Mother would be glad to let someone have them. Surely our country will find a place for them. I recognize the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Jontz, for any open- ing statement he may have. Mr. JONTZ. I thank the chairman and want to identify with his eloquent remarks. This is a very timely opportunity for us to take thoughtful pause and reflect on our responsibilities in this Nation and in this world today. Thank you for scheduling the hearing this afternoon. Mr. KoSTMAYER. I appreciate the gentleman's presence. I am delighted to welcome our first panel: Mr. Bjorn J. Gruen- wald, a Holocaust survivor; and Mrs. Edith Millman, also a Holo- caust survivor. Both of your statements will be made a part of the record. Please proceed. Feel free to speak extemporaneously if you would like. And, Mrs. Millman, why don't we begin with you? PANEL CONSISTING OF EDITH MILLMAN, HOLOCAUST SURVIVOR; AND BJORN J. GRUENWALD, HOLOCAUST SURVIVOR Mrs. MILLMAN. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee. My name is Edith Millman. I was born in Sile- sia, Poland, in May 1924. My father was an executive in an oil com- pany, and I had an upper-middle-class upbringing. It was a happy childhood, with the promise of a bright future. I grew up in a large, warm, supportive family in which moral values, charity and em- phasis on education were the guiding principles of everyday life. My parents were very active in both Jewish and secular Polish communal and charitable organizations. We lived in Warsaw in 1939. During the bombing in September 1939 our building received a direct hit. I was injured and spent the rest of the siege in an unventilated subbasement on a pile of coal. Although I was burning with fever, I was refused even a drop of water by the janitor of the building, simply because I was Jewish. After the fall of Warsaw to the-Nazis, the terror started almost immediately. All Jews had to wear white armbands with-a blue Star of David as a means of immediate identification and thus were easy prey for all kinds of cruelty in the street. In November 1940 a ghetto was established in an old, dilapidated part of Warsaw. It was surrounded by a 10-to-li-foot-high brick wall topped with barbed wire. All Gentiles had to move out, and approximately 450,000 Jews, one-third of the entire prewar popula- tion of Warsaw, plus refugees and deportees from other areas, were herded into the ghetto. The daily food rations allotted to us consist- ed of approximately 180 calories, but there was smuggling going on through camouflaged openings in the wall and subterranean tun- nels. I was active in one of many self-help units which collected food, \clothing, and money for the most needy in the tenement. I vividly remember a so-called spoon campaign, where people contributed a spoon of flour, cereal or sugar toward a general collection. The Nazis ordered schools to be closed, but clandestine small groups of students were organized for study. I joined one of these and actually received an excellent education. Since these classes were illegal, we met at different places and, in constant fear of dis- covery, devised all kinds of coverups. Frequently, when studying we gathered around a small carbide lamp, which was the only source of heat and light. Immersion in studies and cultural activi- ties was a means of escape from the horrible reality of our lives and our way of resisting the dehumanization by which the Nazis tried to kill not only our bodies but also our spirit. Germans frequently entered our area and caught people in the street. I was caught, and remember having to wash windows, cling- ing to a window sill on the fifth floor in freezing weather. I was given a bucket of cold water, no rags to wash with, and had to scrape the ice which immediately formed on the window panes with my bare hands. The piece of bread, payment for my work at the end of the day, was taken away from me by a German guard at the ghetto gate. He said that the bread was too good for a Jew and threw it in the snow. In the spring of 1942 conditions deteriorated even more. Thou- sands of people were dying of starvation and disease. Leaving the ghetto without a special permit was punishable by death. Active re- sistance was discouraged because of collective punishment and ig- norance of the planned "final solution." We felt that we had no right to jeopardize the lives of innocent people, especially since we were sure that the allies would win and liberation was only a matter of time. In July -1942 the deportations started. We were told that people were being taken to the east to work. We had no idea about the horrible truth of the "final solution" agreed upon a few months earlier at Wannsee. Between 6,000 and 10,000 people daily were sent off to Treblinka and killed. By devious means, we were de- ceived as to the true nature of our fate. In the beginning of September 1942 those of us who remained were gathered for a final selection to determine who could stay. I still have nightmares about the horrible bestiality during the selec- tion. I witnessed all kinds of atrocities, including those against chil- dren whose parents tried to smuggle them through in knapsacks and baskets. Some of these children were either shot or bayoneted in the knapsacks. Only about 35,000 people, the so-called produc- tive, were allowed to remain. At this time I worked at Schulz, a German factory within the ghetto. Each factory was a self-contained compound where we lived and worked for 10 hours a day, in constant terror, on a meager ration of watery soup. I lived through a few more selections and finally escaped to the Aryan side of Warsaw. There I obtained a false identity card, and later, because of my knowledge of the German language, a position at the railway as a Polish Gentile. At work I was able to steal blank railroad identity cards and sup- plementary food stamps, which I gave to a friend from the Polish underground. I also stole coal from the trains and supported a four- member Jewish family hidden in a hut. We dug a hole under the floor of another hut, where my father could hide. I lived in constant fear of being discovered. My life was in con- stant danger. Extortionists and blackmailers had a field day de- nouncing Jews. One of my girlfriends, whom I tried to shelter, was so terrified of living outside the ghetto that she returned there and died a heroic death during the uprising in April 1943. I had many close calls, some quite tragic and others almost hu- morous. Surviving frequently was based on pure luck. But at other times, when I was numb from fear, plain chutzpa took over. An ex- ample of the latter was when I found myself caught by a Polish policeman. I shook myself free from his grasp, ran across the street to the German MP and, showing him my false identity card, asked him to either arrest me or tell the Polish policeman to let me go. He angrily confronted the policeman, telling him to look for Jews and bandits and not to bother pretty girls. Several times I found help from unexpected sources. One time, my father was being hidden under the bed of a prostitute, who ab- solutely refused any payment for her life-saving kindness. On the other hand, I remember a night of mental and physical fear caused by several extortionists. My parents and I were left almost naked and escaped through a hole in the attic and over the roof just before the Gestapo arrived. We had to move many times and barely escaped one step ahead of the Gestapo. One time, when I was on my way to a small town to try to save one of my cousins, I was thrown out of a moving train by a Ukrainian gang who sus- pected me of being Jewish. Another time, my boyfriend was killed- right in front of me, trying to protect me and give me more time to escape. I lost 48 members of my family. My youngest cousin was only 11/2 years old; my oldest, 16. Of my many cousins, only 2 survived. Of my father's eight siblings, only two survived. Of my mother's five, only one survived. I learned that one of my grandfathers was clubbed to death because he could not walk fast enough while being marched to Auschwitz. So perfect was the deceit and perfidy of the SS that, not knowing what awaited him, and being a very neat man, he packed a shoe- brush and shoepolish in his knapsack to take with him. I also learned that one of my aunts, a beautiful woman of 28, was beaten to death because she dared to answer an SS man that if she were a dirty pig, as he called her, she would not be standing at an ungodly hour to be first in line for a shower. One of my uncles, a lawyer, and his family were killed because, when asked to organize a labor battalion, he had the chutzpa to demand a written guarantee that the same number of people would return and be in the same condition as when they left for work. Of 35 girls in my prewar high school, only two survived. I am one of them. Of my seven study companions in the ghetto, all bright and talented girls, I am tbc only one who escaped death. I frequently feel too dead inside to even mourn the youth and dreams which were robbed from me or the lonely, uprooted life which does not seen to have a foundation. I don't know why I sur- vived, and my whole life since the war was and is a fruitless quest for a meaning of my survival. Unable to find an answer, haunted by flashbacks and nightmares, I suffer bouts of depression and anx- iety which I feel have ruined my life. 6 Thank you for the opportunity to appear here today. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you very much, Mrs. Millman, for your testimony. [Prepared statement of Mrs. Millman follows:] 7

STATEMENT OF MRS. EDITH MILLMAN BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT HOUSE COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS FEBRUARY 5, 1992

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee. My name is Edith Millman. I was born in Silesia, Poland in May 1924. My father was an executive in an American oil company and I had an upper middle class upbringing. It was a happy childhood with the promise of a bright future. I grew up in a large, warm, supportive family in which moral values, charity and emphasis on education were the guiding principles of everyday life. My parents were very active in both Jewish and secular Polish communal and charitable organizations. We lived in Warsaw in 1939. During the bombing in September of 1939, our building received a direct hit. I was injured and spent the rest of the siege in an unventilated sub-basement on a pile of coal. Although I was burning with fever, I was refused even a drop of water by the janitor of the building simply because I was Jewish. After the fall of Warsaw to the Nazis, the terror started almost immediately. All Jews had to wear white armbands with a blue star of David as a means of immediate identification, and thus were easy prey for all kinds of cruelty in the streets. In November 1940 a ghetto was established in an old dilapidated part of Warsaw. It was surrounded by a 10 to 11 foot high brick wall topped with barbed wire. All gentiles had to move out and approximately 450,000 Jews, one third of the entire prewar population of Warsaw, plus refugees and deportees from other areas were herded into the ghetto. The daily food rations allotted to us consisted of approximately 180 calories, but there was smuggling going on through camouflaged openings in the wall and subterranean tunnels. I was active in one of many self-help units which collected food, clothing and money for the most needy in the tenements. I vividly remember a so-called "spoon campaign" where people contributed a spoon of flour, cereal or sugar toward a general collection. The Nazis ordered schools to be closed, but clandestine small groups of students were organized for study. I joined one of these and actually received an excellent eduction. Since these classes were illegal, we met at different places and, in constant fear of discovery, devised all kinds of cover-ups. Frequently, when studying,- we gathered around a small carbide lamp Which was the only source of heat and light. Immersion in studies and cultural activities was a means of escape from the horrid reality of our lives and our way of resisting the dehumanization by which the Nazis tried to kill not only our bodies but also our spirit. Germans frequently entered our area and caught people in the street. I was caught and remember having to wash windows, clinging to a window sil' on the fifth floor in freezing weather. I was given a bucket of cold water, no rags to wash with, and had to scrape the ice which immediately formed on the window panes with my bare hands. The piece of bread, payment for my work at the end of the day, was taken away from me by a German guard at the ghetto gate. He said that the bread was too good for a Jew and threw it in the snow. In the spring of 1942, conditions deteriorated even more. Thousands of people were dying of starvation and disease. Leaving the ghetto without a special permit was punishable by death. Active resistance was discouraged because of collective punishments and ignorance of the planned "Final Solution." We felt that we had no right to jeopardize the lives of innocent people, especially since we were sure that the Allies would win and liberation was only a matter of time.

In July of 1942 the deportations started. We were told that people were being taken to the "East" to work. We had no idea about the horrible truth of the "Final Solution" agreed upon a few months earlier at Wannsee. Between 6,000 and 10,000 people daily were sent off to Treblinka and killed. By devious means we were deceived as to the true nature of our fate. In the beginning of September 1942 those of us who remained were gathered for a final selection to determine who could stay. I still have nightmares about the horrible bestiality during this selection. I witnessed all kinds of atrocities including those against children whose parents tried to smuggle them through in knapsacks and baskets. Some of these children were either shot or bayoneted in the knapsacks.- Only about 35,000 people--the so-callpd "productive"--were allowed to remain. At this time I worked at Schulz, a German factory within the ghetto. Each factory was a self-contained compound where we lived and worked for 10 hours a day in constant terror on a meager ration of watery soup. I lived through a few more selections and finally escaped to the Aryan side of Warsaw. There I obtained a false identity card and later, because of my knowledge of the German language, a position at the railway as a Polish gentile. At work I was able to steal blank railroad identity cards and supplementary food stamps which I gave to a friend from the 9

Polish underground. I also stole coal from the trains and supported a four-member Jewish family hidden in a hut. We dug a hole under the floor of another hut where my father could hide. I lived in constant fear of being Wsbcovered;my life was in constant danger. Extortionists and blackmailers had a field day denouncing Jews. One of my girlfriends whom I tried to shelter---- was so terrified of living outside the ghetto that she returned there and died a heroic death during the uprising in April 1943. I had many close calls, some quite tragic and other almost humorous. Surviving frequently was based on pure luck, but at other times, when I was numb from fear, plain chutzpa took over. An example of the latter was when I found myself caught by a Polish policeman. I shook myself free from his grasp, ran across the street to the German MP and, showing him my false identity card, asked him to either arrest me or tell the Polish policeman to let me go. He angrily confronted the policeman, telling him to look for Jews and bandits and not to bother pretty girls. Several times we found help from unexpected sources. One time my father was being hidden under the bed of a prostitute who absolutely refused any payment for her life- saving kindness. On the other hand I remember a night of mental and physical terror caused by several extortionists. My parents and I were left almost naked and escaped through a hole in the attic and over the roof just before the Gestapo arrived. We had to move many times and barely escaped one step ahead of the Gestapo. One time when I was on my way to a small town to try to save one of my cousins, I was thrown out of a moving train by a Ukrainian gang who suspected me of being Jewish.- Another time, my boyfriend was killed right in front of me trying to protect me and give me more time to escape.

I lost 48 members of my family. My youngest cousin was only one and a half years old, my oldest sixteen. Of my many cousins, only two survived. Of my father's eight siblings, only two survived. Of my mother's five, only one survived. I learned that one of my grandfathers was clubbed to death because he could not walk fast enough while being marched to Auschwitz. So perfect was the deceit and perfidy of the SS that not knowing what awaited him, and being a very neat man, he packed a shoe brush and shoe polish in his knapsack to take with him. I also learned that one of my aunts, a beautiful woman of twenty-eight, was beaten to death because she dared to answer an SS man that if she were a dirty pig, as he called her, she would not be standing at an ungodly hour to be first in line for a shower. One of my uncles, a lawyer, and his family were killed because, when asked to organize a labor battalion, he had the chutzpa to demand a written guarantee that the same number of people would return and be in the same condition as when they left for work. Of 35 girls in my pre-war high school class, only two survived. I am one of them. Of my seven study companions in the ghetto, 10 all bright and talented girls, I am the only one who escaped death. I frequently feel too dead inside to even mourn the youth and drcams which were robbed from me or the loneIy uprooted life which does not seem to have a foundation. I don't kno why I survived, and my whole life since the war was and is a fruitless quest for a meaning of my survival. Unable to find an answer, haunted by flashbacks and nightmares, I suffer bouts of depression and anxiety which I feel have ruined my life. Thank you for the opportunity t appear here today. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Before I recognize Mr. Gruenwald, I want to invite those who are standing to feel free to come and take a seat here. We have plenty of room. Please feel free to take a seat on the lower panel. I want to recognize the gentleman from Guam, Mr. Blaz, if he has an opening statement at this time. Mr. BLAz. I don't have an opening statement, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to be here to listen to this testimony. It is testimony that I try to listen to whenever I can. It is one of those chapters in all of our lives, and it continues to have an impact on us. And the more I listen the more I am persuaded that we need to finish the project that is still underway. Thank you for recognizing me, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, ma'am, for your testimony. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Without objection, the statement of the gentle- man from Utah, Mr. Owens, will be made a part of the record. Since he is here, I recognize him at this time. Mr. OWENS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased that the hearing is being held at this important time, commemorating this dreadful meeting that was held 50 years ago. I am very grateful that the chairman has seen fit to focus on it. I do have a statement, which I would ask be entered into the record in full. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Without objection. Thank you. [Prepared statement of Mr. Owens follows:] Statement of U.S. Rep. Wayne Owens of Utah Before the Interior and Insular Affairs Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment Hearing on the U.S. Holocaust Museum: 50th Anniversary of the Wannsee Conference February 5, 1992

MR. CHAIRMAN, I WANT TO COMMEND YOU FOR HOLDING THIS TIMELY

AND IMPORTANT HEARING. TIMELY, BECAUSE WE JUST RECENTLY

COMMEMORATED THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE WANNSEE CONFERENCE,

WHERE NAZI LEADERS DISCUSSED AND COORDINATED IMPLEMENTATION OF

THE "FINAL SOLUTION." THIS HEARING IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE, AS THE

RECENT DER SPIEGEL POLL REFLECT, MANY GERMANS SIMPLY WANT TO

FORGET ABOUT THE HOLOCAUST. WE MUST NOT ALLOW ANYONE TO

FORGET.

AS A REPEAT VISITOR TO YAD VASHEM, THE HOLOCAUST MUSEUM IN

JERUSALEM, AND ONE WHO HAS SPENT THREE YEARS OF HIS YOUTH IN

EUROPE, THE PHRASE "NEVER FORGET" HAS SPECIAL MEANING TO ME. SO

DO THE WORDS "NEVER AGAIN." AND I HAVE BEEN PARTICULARLY

DISTURBED TO LEARN THAT A FULL THIRD OF THOSE GERMANS POLLED BY

DER SPIEGEL FELT THAT JEWS HAVE TOO MUCH INFLUENCE IN THE WORLD

AND THAT JEWS ARE PARTLY TO BLAME IF THEY ARE PERSECUTED AND

HATED. 13

IT IS HARD TO BELIEVE THAT A GROUP OF HUMAN BEINGS COULD

ACTUALLY SIT DOWN AND CALMLY AND COMPREHENSIVELY PLAN THE

MURDER OF 11 MILLION PEOPLE. THERE WAS A WHOLE MASS MURDER

BUREAUCRACY. THE WANNSEE CONFERENCE WAS LITERALLY A CABINET

MEETING TO COORDINATE AND IMPLEMENT THE EXTINCTION OF AN ENTIRE

RACE. THEY DID NOT MERELY DISCUSS JEWS LIVING IN COUNTRIES ALREADY

UNDER NAZI CONTROL. NO, THE NAZIS PLANNED FOR THE ANNIHILATION OF

JEWS IN IRELAND AND ENGLAND, COUNTRIES HITLER HOPED TO CONQUER.

IT WAS OVER IN ABOUT AN HOUR-AND-A-HALF. ACCORDING TO ADOLF

EICHMANN, THE MEETING WENT EVEN BETTER THAN EXPECTED AND THE

PARTICIPANTS WERE ENTHUSIASTIC AND COMMITTED TO THEIR TASK.

I SAW ON THE RECENT U.S. HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM

NEWSLETTER AN ARTICLE ON HOLOCAUST EDUCATION. THE ARTICLE BEGAN

WITH SHAKESPEARE'S WORD'S "WHAT'S PAST IS PROLOGVF." THAT IS A

CHILLING PHRASE IN THIS CONTEXT. NOTHING COULD BETTER EXPLAIN

CHARACTERIZE THE NEED FOR HOLOCAUST EDUCATION IN THE UNITED

STATES, WHICH IS WHY THE U.S. HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM IS SO

VITAL TO THIS COUNTRY AND TO THE MILLIONS OF FOREIGNERS WHO VISIT

HERE.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Mr. Gruenwald, thank you for being with us today. Please proceed. Mr. GRUENWALD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Members of the subcommittee. On January 20, 1942, Hitler finalized his plans for the genocide of the European Jews, at the Wannsee villa outside Berlin. Millions were condemned to humiliating deaths in the concentration camps of Germany and Poland. My parents, my grandparents, my cousins, aunts, and uncles were among them. I am one of the survivors, one of the hidden children. Actually, I am a survivor of the survivors, one of the few who have not terminated their anguish in suicide or required permanent institutionalization. I am pleased to be here today to be able to tell you very briefly the story of how Hitler's war against the Jews affected my life, a story which until last year I would have been unable to tell. In preparation for the so-called "final solution" the Jews had been systematically stripped of all human protection and made into stateless and identity-less wanderers in Europe. For much of my life, and long after World War II was over, the Government of Hol- land, the country in which I was born and hidden, perpetuated this stateless condition, with devastating consequences for me and for thousands of other hidden children of the Holocaust. Access to any and all of my records were denied. I couldn't even obtain so simple a document as my birth certificate. I remained a stateless nonenti- ty until 1965, wilen Sweden granted me Swedish citizenship. Last year, after considerable efforts by me and many sympathet- ic people and institutions in Holland, I finally was able to get the few facts I now have. The Dutch Government finally released a document indicating my date and place of birth and allowed me access to files in their archives which revealed some facts about my parents and relatives. That it has taken me some 50 years to learn even these meager facts about myself and my family was a direct consequence of the conscious long-term policy of the Dutch Government. Unfortunate- ly, antisemitism didn't die with Hitler. It flourishes to this day in Europe and in this country in individuals and in government. Let me now share with you the pieces of my story that I have been able to put together. Both my father and my mother were Jewish. My father had fled Hungary, together with his mother in the 1930's and came to Holland, where he met my mother. She was a Dutch citizen. They were married in 1937. I was born in Amster- dam, Holland, on January 19, 1940, lms than 4 months before the German occupation of Holland. I was almost 3 years old, toward the end of 1942, when my par- ents were rounded up with other Jews by both Germans and Dutch collaborators and subsequently shipped off to the death camps. Only a few months later, my father Andor and my mother Rachel were gassed to death in Sobibor, Poland, on April 23, 1943. Just before my parents were seized, I was taken away from them by total strangers, to find protection from the fate that my parents were about to encounter. I was first hidden for a few weeks in a town west of Amsterdam called Haarlem. Shortly thereafter I was again taken by total strangers to another town in a more central part of Holland, called Gorkum, where I was sheltered by a strict Calvinist couple in their late 1940's who did not have any children of their own. When I arrived there, the woman was disappointed because she wanted a girl. Her heart softened somewhat when she saw the tears on my cheeks, and they took me into their home. These were traumatic experiences for me at such a young age, and I can still vaguely remember that. The only things I carried with me were half of a picture of myself at the age of 2 1/2, and a doll. The picture was cut in a zig- zag pattern, serving as a key to my father. He had the other half of that picture in his possession, hoping to find and identify me after the war by fitting the two parts together. My father never re- turned, and neither did the other half of that picture, both prob- ably buried somewhere in the Sobibor. I clung to the doll which I had received from my father, for dear life. It was the only possession which gave me solace and comfort. But my doll was taken away from me. My new foster parents were going to teach me that affection is something sinful in a Dutch Cal- vinist environment. Little did I then know that this would be the beginning of a 15- year nightmare. The early years in Holland were characterized by fear and intimidation and the indoctrination in Calvinist dogma. I was forced to practice a Calvinist version of Christianity. This in- stilled in me a deep shame for my Jewish heritage and, for that matter, anything that had to do with Jews and Judaism, and which lasted until I was in my 50's. My foster parents and members of their local Reformed Church intended for me to become a missionary among the Jews and con- vert them into the doctrines of John Calvin, away from, as they saw it, the sinful, strange, and barbaric Judaic traditions and rit- uals. During the latter part of the 1940's and most of the 1950's, in order to obtain the necessary permit to remain in Holland, I had to go every 6 months to the local immigration office, which was a spe- cial section of the police department. The official there would harass me, like so many other stateless persons, with all kinds of reprimands and warnings. They demanded that I be thankful for their generosity of allowing someone so low as a stateless Jew to stay another 6 months in their country. They led me to believe that I had no right to, nor did I deserve, this privilege and threat- ened to put me on a ship at will at any time to be sent to sea and never to return. They assured me that no country in the world would want a stateless Jew like me; therefore, no one would ever allow me to go on land. For me, the law of Adolf Hitler declaring every Jew state- less was rigorously upheld and enforced by the Dutch Government long after the war was over. Toward the end of the 1950's, in my late teens, after having been humiliated virtually every day of my life at school, in the church, at catechism, at home, and by the police, I could not bear any longer the ever-increasing indignation of my environment. Associa- tion with me implied contamination by Jewish diseases or Jewish thinking. I decided to leave Holland. Lacking the requisite passport and other identity papers, I was forced to cross illegally the borders of Germany, Denmark, and finally into Sweden, where I found people who were willing to help me to start a new life. The Kingdom of Sweden ended my existence as a persona non grata by granting me a name, an identity, and, in 1965, a Swedish citizenship. In other words, I finally became a legitimate son of Mother Earth, a right that the Dutch Government had denied me along with my birth certificate. For 25 years, the policy of the Government of Holland deprived me of the citizenship and the rights of citizenship that belong to all Christian children born of similar parents, simply because I was a Jew. In Sweden, I found the necessary tranquility to study and even- tually receive my first engineering degree. I developed technology which resulted in patents that were sold by the company for which I worked, to an American company in Pennsylvania. This brought me to the United States in 1970. The U.S. Government, through its Immigration and Naturalization Service, declared to me that as a member of the professions or because of exceptional ability in the sciences or arts, I would substantially benefit prospectively the na- tional economy, cultural interests, or welfare of the United States, and granted me the status of permanent resident. Thereafter, I continued with graduate studies and subsequent postgraduate research in engineering and science at the University of Pennsylvania. After having finished those, I became a U.S. citi- zen on June 14, 1978. My certificate of naturalization states that my country of former nationality is Sweden. And of the many who know me, I am perceived as an immigrant from Sweden. Ironically, nothing ever points to Holland, the country where I was born. I became the founder and principal shareholder in a computer technology company that was established on the results of my pre- vious research and which is continuing to develop and market a revolutionary approach to parallel processing. My technology is being exported today to Europe, including Holland. This so genu- inely American phenomenon of entrepreneurship and free enter- prise has given me the opportunity and ability to create and con- tinue to create new jobs for American citizens. It has been a long haul from a stateless, identity-less and dis- placed-person status to that of an American scientist and engineer carrying a U.S. passport when visiting Europe and giving lectures at universities or negotiating business transactions. Finally, I would like to conclude with a recent statement from my oldest daughter, Ulrika, who lives in New York and who soon will be marrying a Jewish man whose parents survived Auschwitz and who also sought refuge in Sweden after the war. Since my Cal- vinist upbringing had totally removed me from all Jewish culture, along with my marrying a Gentile, none of my three children were ever introduced to the Jewish faith or its traditions. However, be- cause of my daughter's interest in her roots and her prospective marriage to a Jewish man, she is now converting to Judaism. She told me one day, and I quote: Dad, my grandparents were Jewish, and that culture wasn't only taken away from you, but you were also denied any access to it and made to feel ashamed be- cause of it. I was not brought up in it either because of your childhood experiences. Nevertheless, because of me, my children to come will continue your ancestors' an- 17 cient traditions and you can come and look through a mirror to see the reflections of what you have missed in the past, but even more importantly, to see your fami- ly's future. Then the circle will be closed and you will be able to say that Hitler lost after all, and the consequences for our family of the Wannsee Conference of 1942 has finally come to a close. Thank you for the opportunity to appear here today. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Well, thank you very much for your testimony, Mr. Gruenwaid. [Prepared statement of Mr. Gruenwald follows:] 18

Prepared Statement by Bjorn J. Gruenwald

Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: On January 20, 1942, IHitler finalized his plans for the genocide of European Jews, at a Wannsee villa outside Berlin. Millions were condemned to humiliating deaths in the concentration camps of Germany and Poland. My parents, my grandparents, my cousins, aunts and uncles were among them. I am one of the survivors, one of the hidden children. Actually, I am a survivor of the survivors, one of the few who have not tenninated their anguish in suicide or required permanent institutionalization. I am pleased to be here today to be able to tell you very briefly the story of how Hitler's war against the Jews affected my life, a story which until last year I would have been unable to tell. In preparation for the so called "Final Solution", Jews had been systematically stripped of all human protection and made into stateless and identitiless wanderers in Europe. For much of my life and long after WWII was ended, the government of Ilolland-the country in which I was born and hidden-perpetuated this stateless condition with devastating consequences for me and thousands of other hidden children of the Holocaust. Access to any and all of my records were denied. I could not even obtain so simple a document as my birth certificate. I remained a stateless nonientity until 1965, when Sweden.granted me Swedish citizenship Last year, after considerable efforts by me and many sympathetic people and institutions in Ilolland, I finally was able to get the few facts I now have. The Dutch government finally released a document indicating my date and place of birth and allowed me access to files in their archives, which revealed some facts about my parents and relatives. That it has taken me some fifty years to learn even these meager facts about myself and iny family was a direct consequence of the conscious long-term policy of the Dutch government. Unfortunately, anti-semitism didn't die with Hitler. It flourishes to this day, in Europe and in this country, in individuals and in governments.

Let me now share with you the pieces of my story that I have been able to put together. Both my father and my mother were Jewish. My father had fled Hungary together with his mother in the 1930's and came to Holland where he met my mother. She was a Dutch citizen. They were married in 1937. 1 was born in Amsterdam, Holland on January 19, 1940, less than four months before the German occupation of Holland. I was almost three years old, towards the end of 1942, when my parents were rounded up with other Jews by both Germans and Dutch collaborators and subsequently shipped off to the death camps. Only a few months later, my father, Andor, and my mother, Rachel, were gassed to death in Sobibor, Poland on the 23rd of April, 1943. 19

Just before my parents were seized, I was taken away from them by total strangers to find protection from the fate that my parents were about to encounter. I was first hidden for a few weeks in a town west of Amsterdam called Haarlem. Shortly thereafter, I was again taken by total strangers to another town in a more central part of Holland, called Gorkum, where I was sheltered by a strict Calvinist couple in their late forties, who did not have any children of their own. When I arrived there, the woman was disappointed because she wanted a girl. Her heart softened somewhat when she saw the tears on my cheeks and they took me into their home. These were traumatic experiences for me at such a young age, and I can still vaguely remember them.

The only things I carried with me were half of a picture of myself at the age of two and a half and a doll. The picture was cut in a zigzag pattern serving as a key to my father. lie had the other half of this picture in his possession hoping to find and identify me after the war by fitting the two parts together. My father never returned and neither did the other half of that picture, both probably buried somewhere near Sobibor.

I clung to the doll, which I had received from my father, for dear life. It was the only possession that gave ine solace and comfort. But my doll was taken away from ine. My new foster parents were going to leach me that affection is something sinful in a Dutch Calvinist environment. Little did I then know that this would be the beginning of a fifteen year nightmare. The early years in Iolland were characterized by fear and intimidation, and the indoctrination in Calvinist dogma. I was forced to practice a Calvinist version of Christianity. This instilled in me a deep shame for my Jewish heritage and for that matter anything that had to do with Jews and Judaism and which lasted until I was in my fifties. My foster parents and members of their local Reformed Church' intended for me to become a missionary among the Jews and convert them into the doctrines of John Calvin away from, as they saw it, the sinful, strange and barbaric Judaic traditions and rituals. During the latter part of the forties and mlost of the fifties, in order to obtain the necessary permit to remain in Ilolland, I had -,go every six months to the local immigration office, which was a special section of the police department. The officials there would harass me like so many other stateless persons with all kinds of reprimands and warnings. They demanded that I be thankful for their generosity of allowing someone so low as a stateless Jew to stay another six months in their country. They led me to believe that I had no right to, nor did I deserve this privilege, and threatened to put me on a ship, at will, at any time, to be sent to sea and never to return. They assured ic that no country in the world would want a stateless Jew like me. Therefore, no one would ever allow me to go on land. For me, the law of Adolf I litlcr declaring every Jew stateless was rigorously upheld and enforced by the Dutch government long after the war was over.

"Olticiat name of itic thurcth:"Gcrcfttmccrde Kcrkcn in Ncdcrlaiad" Towards the end of the 1950's, in my late teens, after having been humiliated virtually every day of my life, at school, in the church, at catechism, at home and by the police, I could not bear any longer the ever increasing indignation of my environment. Association with me implied contamination by Jewish diseases or Jewish thinking. I decided to leave Holland. Lacking the requisite passport and other identity papers, I was forced to cross illegally the borders of Germany, Denmark and finally into Sweden, where I found people who were willing to help me to start a new life. The Kingdom of Sweden ended my existence as a persona non grata by granting me a name, an identity, and in 1965, a Swedish citizenship. In other words, I finally became a legitimate son of mother Earth, a right that the Dutch government had denied me along with my birth certificate. For twent-,-five years the policy of the government of Holland deprived me of the citizenship and the rights of citizenship that belong to all Christian children born of similar parents, simply because I was a Jew.

In Sweden I found the necessary tranquility to study and eventually received my first Engineering degree. I developed technology which resulted in patents that were sold by the company for which I worked to an American Company in Pennsylvania. This brought me to the United States in 1970. The U.S. government, through its Immigration and Naturalization Service, declared to me that as a member of the professions or because of exceptional ability in the sciences or arts I would substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural interests or welfare of the United States and granted me the status of permanent resident. Thereafter, I continued d with graduate studies and subsequent post graduate research in Engineering and Science at the University of Pennsylvania. After having finished those, I became a U.S. citizen on June 14, 1978. My certificate of naturalization states that my country of former nationality is Sweden and of the many who know me, I am perceived as an immigrant from Sweden. Ironically, nothing ever points to Holland, the country where I was born.

I became the founder and principle shareholder in a computer technology company that was established on the results of my previous research, and which is continuing to develop and market a revolutionary approach to parallel processing. My technology is being exported today to Europe-including Holland.

This so genuinely American phenomenon of entrepreneurship and free enterprise has given me the opportunity and ability to create and continue to create new jobs for American citizens.

It has been a long haul from a stateless, identitiless and displaced person status to that of an American scientist and engineer carrying a U.S. passport when visiting Europe and giving lectures at Universities or negotiating business transactions. Finally, I would like to conclude with a recent statement from my oldest daughter Ulrika, who lives in New York and who soon will be marrying a Jewish man whose parents survived Auschwitz and who also sought refuge in Sweden after the war. Since my Calvinist upbringing had totally removed me from all Jewish culture, along with my marrying a Gentile, none of my three children were ever introduced to the Jewish faith or its traditions. However, because of my daughter's interest in her roots and her prospective marriage to a Jewish man, she is now converting to Judaism.

3 She told me one day and I quote: "Dad, my grandparents were Jewish and that culture was not only taken away from you, but you were also denied any access to it and made to feel ashamed because of it. I was not brought up in it either because of your childhood experiences. Nevertheless, because of me, my children to come will continue your ancestors' ancient traditions and you can come and look through a mirror to see the reflections of what you have missed in the past, but even more importantly, to see your family's future. Then the circle will be closed and you will be able to say that Hitler lost after all, and the consequences for our family of the Wannsee Conference of 1942, has finally come to a close." Thank you for the opportunity to appear here today. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Mrs. Millman, let me ask you, if I may, this was obviously a difficult experience for you, having to testify and talk about these details, and aside from the obvious fact that you are here because the subcommittee has invited you, I am wondering why you would choose to undergo this again. Wouldn't it have been easier to say simply, "No, thank you, I would rather not have to deal with this in public? Mrs. MILLMAN. Well, I feel it is extremely important for every- body, and especially for young people, to know what happened during the war. I am appalled that there are the so-called revision- ists who deny the existence of the Holocaust. I frequently speak to groups, especially to groups of young people, because I feel it is so very important for them to know and so that things like this wouldn't happen in the future. You have to learn tolerance, you have to learn not to look down on other people because of their religion or their race. You have to learn to judge people by what they really are and just see other points of view and be tolerant and not to treat anybody as lower than what you are, because that leads then to persecution. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Well, I agree with you. As you know, some of the various States have denied David Duke access to the ballot in his campaign. I am wondering if you think that approach by the States, since obviously you and I havc con- tempt for the things for which Mr. Duke stands, I am wondering if you think that approach by the States is one which can work or whether it's a bad idea or a good idea, and how your experiences as a victim of intolerance relate to that? Mrs. MILLMAN. Well, I feel it's a good idea to deny him that be- cause we know what he really stands for, no matter what he says now. And I am just afraid that his influence might grow even more. He might-because of the economic conditions now in this country, I know that scapegoats are always looked for in situations like this. I am just afraid of what might happen in the future. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Let me ask you one more question. You told of at least one experience during the war in which your father, I guess, was rescued by a prostitute. Mrs. MILLMAN. Yes. Mr. KOSTMAYER. There were other experiences where your family was rescued by people in Poland, in Nazi-occupied Poland? Mrs. MILLMAN. Yes. There were instances where we were helped, and again instances where we were not helped and denounced. And I really couldn't tell you what made some people good and what made other people bad. I had many different experiences, and the time is too limited for me to go into many of the other ones. I did, we did, experience, we did get help. Sometimes we had to pay for that help. Sometimes we did not. On the other hand, we had some harrowing experiences for no reason other than because we were Jewish. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Mr. Gruenwald, let me ask you what you think about the issue of denying David Duke access to the ballot in the various States. Do you think that is an approach which can work in dealing with him, or not? Mr. GRUENWALD. I think one of the most important issues is that these people are exposed, you can see them, they have the opportu- nity to tell their story. No matter how negative and bad it is, let them tell their story. That is better than, I think, in so many other countries where things are forbidden and you never know who they are. By having him tell his story and the people of America can see their actions, I think it becomes a natural consequence that many people will deny a person of his qualities access to the ballot hence- -forth. So, I believe that the natural democratic process in the United States is a very powerful force to let that whole issue come to a natural conclusion. Mr. KOSTMAYER. The gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Jontz? Mr. JONTZ. I have no questions. I do want to thank both the wit- nesses for their very powerful statements. Thank you. Mr. KOSTMAYER. The gentleman from Guam, Mr. Blaz. . Mr. BLAz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. After listening to Mr. Gruenwald and listening to his response to your question, it is even more astonishing that a man of such expe- rience would believe in a system or a country that he would state that. I have great admiration and respect for you here even beyond your testimony, sir. Thank you. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Mrs. Millman, Mr. Gruenwald, thank you very much for appearing before the subcommittee this afternoon. We appreciate your testimony more than we can say. The second panel. Ms. Sara J. Bloomfield, the executive director of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council; Dr. Sybil Milton, the resi- dent historian at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council; and Mr. A lvin Rosenfeld, a research consultant at the U.S. Holocaust Me- morial Council. Ms. Bloomfield, would you like to begin? PANEL FROM THE U.S. HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL COUNCIL CON- SISTING OF SARA J. BLOOMFIELD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR; SYBIL MILTON, RESIDENT HISTORIAN; AND ALVIN ROSEN. FELD, RESEARCH CONSULTANT Ms. BLOOMFIELD. Yes, sir. Before I begin, I have to say that it's quite difficult to give testimony after hearing what we have just heard. I feel my prepared remarks are inadequate. But neverthe- less I will go forward, but I just needed to say that first. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you. Ms. BLOOMFIELD. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, you will hear a great deal today about the Wannsee Conference and its historical context from my distinguished colleagues. It is not neces- sary, then, to expand upon the conference itself, but this indepth retrospective examination lends an important insight into the meaning of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum and its location here in Washington, adjacent to the mall. For the Wannsee Confer- ence, indeed the Holocaust itself, was, among other things, a delib- erate, calculated act of state, a policy of government, and the museum shall, in its exhibitions and programs, be the place in the Nation's Capital where citizens will learn what the awesome conse- quences of governmental power perverted to evil purposes can mean. When it opens in April 1993, the museum will stand alongside the other monuments and museums on the mall which serve as re- minders of mankind's great achievements of the past. The Holo- caust Museum, however, will function as a healthy counterpoint, demonstrating the aberration of man's creative impulse, the abuse of power and the fragility of our cherished democratic values, a moral compass for our future. Created specifically for the broadest gexieral public, the museum will educate Americans about this pivotal event of human history and make its lessons meaningful to our contemporary society. The permanent exhibition, which tells the story of the state-sponsored murder of 6 million Jews as well as the persecution and suffering of millions of Gypsies, Poles, homosexuals, the physically and men- tally handicapped, Jehovah's Witnesses, Soviet POWs and others, also confronts American history, teaching our own great Nation's responses to this dreadful event. But the essential message of the museum is the critical impor- tance of individual moral responsibility in society as well as the universal nature of the basic human freedoms so eloquently articu- lated in our Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. The sequence of the exhibition begins with America's first en- counter with the Holocaust, -; war-weary GIs liberated the camps in 1945. America's mo-t fan:o-s liberator, General Dwight D. Ei- senhower, wrote on April 12, 1945, of his visit to the forced-labor camp at Ohrdruf. The things I saw beggar description. The visual evidence of starvation, cruelty and bestiality were so overpowering as to leave me a bit sick. In one room, where there were piled up 20 or 30 naked men killed by starvation, George Patton would not even enter. He sid he would get sick if he did so. I made the visit deliberately in order to be in a position to give firsthand evidence of these things if ever in the future there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to propaganda. Ike's stunning prophetic words begin the visitors' historic jour- ney through a variety of authentic artifacts, photographs, oral tes- timony, film footage and documents. In addition to the affirmative and hopeful story of liberation, the exhibition candidly depicts instances of America's opportunities to respond to the Holocaust and her tragic failure to do so. In doing so, the museum's exhibition will also serve as confirmation of America's capacity for self-reflection, to face her past honestly, if painfully. The exhibition will emphasize the inspiring stories of ordinary people who at great personal risk rescued those targeted by the Nazis. We know that throughout the Holocaust people had choices. The perpetrators certainly made clear choices. The bystanders had choices, and chose to do nothing. The victims had "choiceless choices" imposed upon them. But some people, with great courage, made the choice to act morally. Visitors will understand the tragic consequences of inaction and indifference and learn how one per- son's heroism could and did change history. Above all, the museum will be a powerful testament to the tragedies of our past as well as to the hopeful possibilities of mankind's future. As an institution whose primary mission is education, the museum will include the U.S. Holocaust Research Institute, with a comprehensive archive, library, and scholars center, a computer- ized interactive learning center for independent learning, two gal- leries for special exhibitions as well as a traveling exhibition pro- gram, an education center for schools and other groups, and two auditoriums for special educational and cultural programs. The museum recognizes that most Americans do not visit Wash- ington. Consequently, we have begun pilot educational outreach projects that include the development of materials for classroom use, curriculum guides for educators, and teacher- training work- shops at various sites nationwide. The Wannsee Conference is just a small story, almost a paren- thetical vignette, in this large epic of human history which we now call the Holocaust. But Wannsee sheds light on some of the impor- tant universal lessons of this tragic event, lessons which the museum will impart to its visitors. The conference reminds us that 6 million Jews and 5 million non-Jews were not murdered by just a few insane Nazis but by tens of thousands of people-many of them government bureaucrats like myself. And of course, they were greatly assisted by the indifference of millions of others. The museum reminds us that silence and indifference are evil's great accomplices. They always benefit the murderer, never the mur- dered. Some of the perpetrators poured poisonous Zyklon B gas into gas chambers; some prepared the train schedules for the thousands of deportations; others attended meetings like Wannsee Conference and then issued orders, an activity that happens every day in this city. The museum reminds us that ordinary people made the Holo- caust happen. The perpetrators were, in some ways, people like us. The museum reminds us that what is legal may not be moral, that liberty without justice is dangerous, and that when our poli- tics, our culture, our science are detached from their moral under- pinnings, even the greatest of civilizations can go tragically awry. Although America should not need reminding, the museum re- minds us of the evils of racism. In our pluralistic Nation, the Holo- caust lesson demonstrates just how critical the virtue of tolerance is for our future and just how precarious our lives are in its ab- sence. An architectural critic praising the museum's physical design wrote, "This museum has bad manners, and it should." Indeed, the museum will be rude to its guests. It will be provocative and de- manding, it will be penetrating and compelling, it will force a per- sonal confrontation not only with evil but, more importantly, with good and indifference in the face of evil. The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum will leave us with the dif- ficult burden of knowledge, knowledge of human nature and the whole range of human capabilities, knowledge of perpetration, action, and inaction, knowledge that individuals can and did make a difference and therefore there is hope for mankind, and finally the terrible knowledge that responsibility for that hope rests solely with us. [Prepiared statement of Ms. Bloomfield follows:] 26

TESTIMONY OF SARA J. BLOOMFIELD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR U.S. HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL COUNCIL FEBRUARY 5, 1992

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, you will hear a great deal today about the Wannsee Conference and its historical

context from my distinguished colleagues. It is not necessary,

then, to expand upon the Conference itself, but this in-depth,

retrospective examination lends an important insight into the

meaning of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and its

location here in Washington adjacent to the Mall. For the

Wannsee Conference -- indeed the Holocaust itself-- was, among

other things, a deliberate, calculated act of a state, a policy

of government; and the Museum shall, in its exhibition and

programs, be the place in the Nation's capital where citizens

will learn what the awesome consequences of governmental power,

perverted to evil purposes, can mean.

When it opens in April 1993, the Museum will stand alongside the other monuments and museums on the Mall which serve as reminders of mankind's great achievements of the past. The Holocaust

Museum, however, will function as a healthy counterpoint -- demonstrating the aberration of man's creative impulse, the abuse of power and the fragility of our cherished democratic values. A moral compass for our future.

Created specifically for the broadest general public, the Museum will educate Americans about this pivotal event of human history and make its lessons meaningful to our contemporary society. -2-

The permanent exhibition, which tells the story of the state-

sponsored murder of six million Jews as well as the persecution

and suffering of millions of Gypsies, Poles, homosexuals, the

physically and mentally handicapped, Jehovah's Witnesses, Soviet

POWs and others, also confronts American history, teaching our

own great nation's responses to this dreadful event. But the

essential message of the Museum is the critical importance of

individual moral responsibility in society, as well as the

universal nature of the basic human freedoms -- so eloquently articulated in our Declaration of Independence and the Bill of

Rights.

The sequence of the exhibition begins with America's first encounter with the Holocaust, as war-weary GI's liberated the camps in 1945. America's most famous liberator, General Dwight

D. Eisenhower, wrote on April 12, 1945 of his visit to the forced labor camp at Ohrdruf: "The things I saw beggar description...

The visual evidence of starvation, cruelty and bestiality were so overpowering as to leave me a bit sick. In one room, where there were piled up twenty or thirty naked men killed by starvation,

George Patton would not even enter. He said he would get sick if he did so. I made the visit deliberately in order to be in a position to give first hand evidence of these things if ever, in the future, there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to propaganda." -3- Ike's stunning, prophetic words begin the visitor's historic journey through a variety of authentic artifacts, photographs, oral testimony, film footage and documents. In addition to the affirmative and hopeful story of liberation, the exhibition candidly depicts instances of America's opportunities to respond to the Holocaust -- and her tragic failure to do so. In doing so, the Museum's exhibition will also serve as confirmation of America's capacity for self-reflection, to face her past honestly, if painfully.

The exhibition will emphasize the inspiring stories of ordinary people who, at great personal risk, rescued those targeted by the Nazis. We know that throughout the Holocaust people had choices. The perpetrators certainly made clear choices; the bystanders had choices and chose to do nothing; the victims had "choiceless choices" imposed upon them. But some people, with great courage, made the choice to act morally. Visitors will understand the tragic consequences of inaction and indifference and learn how one person's heroism could and did change history. Above all, the Museum will be a powerful testament to the tragedies of our past as well as to the hopeful possibilities of mankind's future.

As an institution whose primary mission is education, the Museum will include: the United States Holocaust Research Institute, with a comprehensive archive, library and scholars' center; a computerized interactive learning center for independent -4-

learning; two galleries for special exhibitions as well as a travelling exhibition program; an education center for schools

and otrer groups; and two auditoriums for special educational and

cultural programs. The Museum recognizes that most Americans do

not visit Washington; consequently, we have begun pilot

educational outreach projects that include the development of

materials for classroom use, curriculum guides for educators and

teacher training workshops at various sites nationwide.

Enthusiastically endorsed by Presidents Carter, Reagan anr' Bu ih,

the Museum has already attracted significant national and

international attention and support. In accordance with its

legislative mandate that the Museum must be constructed from

private funds, the Museum has raised to date approximately $133 million dollars in cash and pledges from more than 68,000 donors

from-all fifty states. These gifts include pennies from school children, a small inheritance from a nun, and $1 million from a

Mormon.

The Wannsee Conference is just a small story -- almost a parenthetical vignette -- in this large epic of human history which we now call the Holocaust. But Wannsee sheds light on some of the important, universal lessons of this tragic event... lessons which the Museum will impart to its visitors; The

Conference reminds us that six million Jews and five million non-

Jews were not brutally murdered by a few insane Nazis .... but by

55-199 0 - 92 - 2 30

-5- tens of thousands of people-- many of them government bureaucrats like myself. And, of course, they were greatly assisted by the indifference of millions of othors. The Museum reminds us that silence and indifference are evil's great accomplices; they always benefit the murderer, never the murdered.

Some of the perpetrators poured poisonous Zyklon B into gas chambers -- some prepared the train schedules for the thousands of deportations -- others attended meetings like the Wannsee Conference and then issued orders -- an activity that happens every day in this city. The Museum reminds us that ordinary people made the Holocaust happen. The perpetrators were, in some ways, people like us.

The Museum reminds us that what is legal may not be moral; that liberty without justice is dangerous; and that when our politics, our culture, our science are detached from their moral under- pinnings, even the greatest of civilizations can go tragically awry.

Although America should not need reminding, the Museum reminds us of the evils of racism. In our pluralistic nation, the Holocaust lesson demonstrates just how critical the virtue of tolerance is for our future, and just how precarious our lives are in its absence. 31

-6- An architectural critic praising the Museum's physical design wrote, "This museum has bad manners and it should." Indeed, this museum will be rude to its guests -- it will be provocative and demanding; it will be penetrating and compelling; it will force a personal confrontation not only with evil, but more importantly with good and indifference in the face of evil.

The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum will leave us with the difficult burden of knowledge: Knowledge of human nature and the whole range of human capabilities. Knowledge of perpetra- tion, action and inaction. Knowledge that individuals can and did make a difference, and therefore there is hope for mankind. And finally, the terrible knowledge that responsibility for that hope rests solely with us. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you very much. Dr. Milton, before I recognize you, I want to recognize the gentle- man from Connecticut, Mr. Gejdenson, for any opening statement he may have at this time. Mr. GEJDENSON. Let me apologize to the panel. I am caught be- tween several responsibilities on the floor and the hearing today. And I commend the chairman for his work on this and so many other issues dealing with human rights and the plight of suffering people around the world. This is a particularly difficult subject for me, my parents having survived the Holocaust in Europe. We weren't a family that had fireside chats about what went on. It obviously was not the kind of issue that generally parents probably wanted to talk to their kids about, or at least in our family. The details obviously came out over time, and about 11/2 years ago Peter Wyden, whose son is a colleague from Oregon, Ron Wyden, was doing a book on children of the Holocaust. It's a little hard to think of yourself as a child in your mid-40's. But nonethe- less he came by the house for an interview and interviewed me and my father. And sometimes it's hard to figure out what comes from all this, you know, the people who listen all too often know too much and those that don't want to listen or question the facts don't want to hear any of it. But I guess from your kids or your grand- children you start to figure that some of this ought to be laid out in a personal way. So we went through -the interview, and Peter Wyden is an in- credible researcher and a great author, having done books on the Bay of Pigs and the Spanish Civil War, the situation in Berlin fol- lowing World War II. ThE book on the Spanish Civil War did 10,000 interviews. So he's just a remarkable author. We started looking for the town my father came from, Pro- vyanov. It was such a small town that he couldn't find it anywhere. I used the prerogative of being a Member of Congress to get the CIA to bring me over some maps of the Soviet Union and, in White Russia, found the railroad stop that was indeed the place where my father and his family lived, and several hundred other Jews and non-Jews. In Peter Wyden's research, he came across a book by Professor Dan Barron, who is presently at Harvard or MIT for the year. I would like to place a section of that in the record here today and would just like to read one paragraph. My father came from Provyanov, a very, very small town in Poland. "I was transferred"-this is a young man who had been a local Free Protestant minister, joined the Nazi Party because he saw it as a way to move up in the railroad administration. His son actually is the one who came to the professor with a letter from his father. His father had had a nervous breakdown after he saw what happened in my father's village, and he was a Nazi that my father described as somebody who was nice to the Jews. We are all skeptics in life, so when I first read this, I thought, well, it's a good way to revise history and the role you played. But my father seemed to indicate that he knew who this man was and that indeed he was somewhat kinder. I would like to read just a little of it. I don't want to take up the committee's time to read all of it. I was transferred to the town of Provyanov, Poland, to work as the head of an auxiliary work squad on February 9, 1942. Among others, there were some 247 Jews, men, women and children, living in the town. He goes on to say, We Germans, four men, were assigned a Jewish cook by the name of Dalah, a sweet young girl with red hair, who was very, very clean. My fellow Germans did not treat her with much respect, since she was after all Jewish. It goes on and then finally comes to this paragraph" Early the next morning we suddenly heard the ghetto was surrounded by the SS. The Jews were herded together and forced out of the ghetto into an open area. They had to take off their shoes, coats and jackets, and they began to weep loudly. A boy of 14 tried to run away, but was shot immediately. In response, a Jewish man became extremely angry and began to rebuke the SS. However, he was brutally beaten on the spot, so he had to be transported in a vehicle. The men of the village were forced to dig a large hole, and everyone, children and women, young and old, had t.9 lie down face to the ground. Among these miserable creatures there was a woman who only the day before had given birth to a child. That woman was the first who had to stand up and go to her grave, in the grave of all. I saw how this woman tottered and reeled, clutching her almost naked infant and crying bitterly, asking for life. She was pushed brutally into the hole and shot. Now, this is one small incident with one small group of victims of the Holocaust, and I would hope-and my sense is that we clear- ly will do this-but the danger is that we draw the conclusion when the numbers get massive that that's when we pay attention. But the first Jews who died as victims of Krystalnacht and the Nazis were nothing spectacular in the history of Europe, they were just one more incident of antisemitism, one more Jew who fell to the crowd. And the same goes for the rest of the world. In most places, thankfully, we don't reach the magnitude of atrocity that occurred in World War II. In Cambodia, some 11/2 to 21/2 million Cambodians were killed; much of the world didn't seem to pay any attention at all. And U.S. policy following that was, in many ways, to support the Pol Pot part of the guerrilla resistance in Cambodia, Pol Pot having been the one that designed the plan that killed some 2 million Cambodians. In East Timor, half the population has been annihilated in the 1980's, a massive deprivation of human rights still exists in many countries around the globe. And I hope that what we have all worked for and what you are testifying about heie today will help not just sensitize us but move us to action whenever we see dis- crimination or hatred, and the lesson for our country as well. David Duke, I think, brought the President up short. He pushed -many of the same buttons that President Bush pushed, trying to get white voters concerned about "all-too-generous treatment" of blacks in our society, talking about quotas and numbers and what have you. David Duke should have shaken the body politic of this country, that we ought not feel too cocky about how we deal with our fellow human beings, .we ought not try to exploit divisions of race, reli- gion, or area of the country, because it can very quickly get out of hand. And I think the Duke candidacy demonstrates that all too well. Again, I apologize to the panel for interrupting them, and I com- mend the chairman for the work he is doing, and I ask unanimous consent to submit the material I have been referring to be a part of the record. Mr. KGSTMAYER. Well, we appreciate the gentleman's remarks, and without objectio.±, will make the documentation which he has submitted a pXrt ox the record. We are delighted for his presence here today. [EDITOR'S NOTE.-Mr. Gejdenson supplied the following docu- ment:] JThis extaordinay ok records e ocsotoewoxe rience Nazi Germany not merely as a relic of the political past 'but as an ever-present legacy that shapes their most familiar' ,,".... ',',remnmscences fled tever,"i.tho of childhood. Nearly.ifty years-choI'g after hisown'b parents e- Nazi takeov Israel psyc o ogist Dan Bar-On went to Germany~ tojinterview the middle-ad :':. children of the Nazi enerationHis, questiQung propels ' them on a sometimes p ouey full of unexpected--=',.' and unwelcome-memories adinights.: W -

"Knowing the worst is terrible but, as Bar-On finds in' this ' powerful and compassionate book, not knowing it is even more terrible. With persistence and an odd tenderness, he explores the psychic wounds of silence and suppresionLegay of Silence . s a journey as muclas a study. Bar-On traveled with personal trepidaton and on a dangerous tellectual borderline." -Richard Eder, Los Angeles Times

"Legacy of Silence is a record of Bar-On's interviews with the (now adult) children of men who ranged from minor func- . tionaries of the Holocaust to serious mass-murderers . This. account probably comesas dose to total honesty as it is hiunanly possible to achieve. And such is [Bar-On's] skill as an inter., -. viewer that one feels his partners ii, dialogue have likewise .-,.. - reached the limits of bearable insight into the mntiyi f . their elders.': ": :,-.,- . -lohn C. Marshall, Nature

. Dan Bar-On is Associate Professor in the Department of ' - " Behavioral Sciences, Ben Gurion University of the Neg"v..

AHiard Ui versi ess 90000 4,...Cafbridge; M asachusetts"' .,. fI .London, England HI

',. '- , "1 q) (.i.,' . ISBN 0-674-52186- 2 Cover esign by Gwen Frankfeldt .. .. : .

- The ilutradcenon the front cover is a comp s ge ' -. and is not ment to represent any actual person ' :. A:''.: -' -': ' ,

BEST AVAILABLE COPY 36

BAR-ON L

...... ENO NTR

f iI WIT

e chapter9 Small Hills Covered with Trees 201

again. He found a job later, I'm not sure exactly when. We were living in quite a primitive little house. Although he was out of a job, my fa- ther built himself a small house in a garden. He was very enterprising, but the thing about him-right up until he died he was a very pious and believing Christian. And that has accompanied me through my entire life-Christianity, being a Christian. At home we would pray- have a Bible hour and sing together. There were also others who'd come over to our place in order to read the word of God together. Smnz11 Hills Covered with Trees I experienced National Socialism right from the start. OK, not from the very beginning, the years before 1930, but after Hitler came to power in 1933 it began to be a reality for me. For me it was something I was born into, I couldn't question it. It was something quite normal. Rudol} answers my ad in the local newspaper: "Children whose parents When I'd see the soldiers marching outside, the Hitler Youth march- witnessed or took part in the persecution or extermination of Jews and/or ing past. for me that was something: I wanted to march too. My Gypsies and who are willing to participatein a researchproject by an Israeli mother would say to me, "Just wait, see what happens, you don't know psychologist at the local university, please . . ." He calls and says he will . ' "Mama, I'd like to be in the Hitler Youth too!" "just wait and see speak only to the Israeli interviewer. We set up a time for the inte-view, and first." Well, I joined the Hitler Youth in 1940. The war had already I agree to meet him at the bus station. begun. I advanced through the ranks very quickly, went to a leader- Compared to the intertnewees I seek out, about whose parents, and their ship school, and became a squad leader (Jungenscharfuhrer). Later I role during the war, I have detailed information, the ad respondents are a became a platoon leader with a group of thirty boys under my com- mystery to me until they tell their stories. I usually reach the meeting place a mand. That's one side of it. I experienced all that directly and with a few minutes ahead of time in order to see the person amving-how he feeling of joy. Now I finally had what I'd been longing for. Now I was a leader. approaches-the station, what he looks like, if he see s troubled or at ease, if I was able to command, although I was still just a child, There is his expression changes when he recognizes me. But Rudolf is already sait- something very theatrical in his way of talking. I wonder if this is his usual manner or if it is due to his excitement in recallingand relating ing, glancing impatiently at his watch (although I am not late). He is tall the events of the past. and looks like a manager in some local firm. A strong handshake. I can B: How old were you then? sense his excitement. He starts talking immediately; but I steer him into small R: I was only eleven when I went to the course where young lead- talk because / want to rea.h my office, where the tape recorder ts set up. ers were trained. I was twelve when I became a squall leader and thir- When we finally reach my room and I invite him to sit down, he pulls a teen or fourteen when I made platoon commander. In any event, yellowed sheaf of papersfrom his briefcase- something very peculiar happened at that time ...well, not peculiar, but something that had a powerful formative influence on me. My R: I was born April 4, 1930. in Wuppertal, the son of an unem- father had found work again even before that, but he wasn't happy. ployed textile worker. My father was out of work at the time. Before He tried to find a position that was more challenging. So he went to he lost his job, he was employed as a master craftsman in a textile work with the railroad. It was called the Reichsbahn then, He laid plant. But there was a great deal of unemployment in the area, and track at first, then he was a station conductor, and later on he worked he was laid off :oo. with the signal box. He always felt attracted to the track gang, the guys B: Are you the only son? who laid track, but he was also preaching sermons as a member of a R: I was the only son until 1940, when my brother was born. lie's Protestant congregation of the Free Church, a congregation that was still alive. He was born on January 14, 1941, in Wuppertal. I spent independent but still Protestant. So he was a preacher. The railroad those very early years more or less pleasantly until my dad found work was his job and being a preacher his love. And his family-his chil- 202 Small Hills Covered with Trees Small Hills Covered with Trees 203 dren-were his pride and joy, his great love. He did a lot of Sunday race. Young people who were now setting school lessons with small children, taught them about the Bible. Ac- out to rule the world-they really wanted to rule the world. So for tually he lived just for the family, for his congregation. us what was predominant was what engaged our feelings. That wasn't Naturally he had to work, and he had this enormous garden. My the only thing though, not just such evening gatherings. Marching out father was a very believing amd religious person, as I said, and he was on the street, marching like soldiers ... we youngsters already filled with a great deal of love. I felt protected in his love. Whatever felt like grown-up soldiers. The music that accompanied us, played by the my father said was right. Then the day came when my father was ap- Hider Youth, with flags and drums through the streets-eveiyone had proached by the Nazi Party, by the National Socialist Gerrian Work- to salute our flags, and we were proud to be full members! The fact that ers' Party. He was already a member of the NSV, the National Socialist we were children was used to prepare us for what was to come. I Welfare Associa-tion. He collected money for the Party and distributed say for what was to come, but what was that going to be? We were as yet unable ration cards-those cards were quite common at that time. So he was to grasp what "later on" might be. We didn't know what was already active in the NSV and was asked to join the Party. I can recall really involved. Who had told us? No one spoke about it. that this had been discussed once at home. I had listened and thought [SighsJ But now I have to return to the subject of my father. My abovt it. I myself was in the Hitler Youth and my view was "Dad, you father was inducted as a railroad man and sent to Russia, to Poland. have to join the Party!" First he resisted. Then he thought that maybe To be more precise, my father was sent to Parafianovo.i That's be- it would be a good idea after all if he joined up: maybe he could ad- tween Vilna and Smolensk. He worked as-what they called during vance more quickly. make headway in his profession and-just the war an adjunct work-squad leader. He had a section of track to maybe-be in a position to shield his congregation. At that time, they take care of. It was between Parafianovo and Smolensk, maybe three didn't want such Christian congregations-I think it was a passing hundred to five hundred kilomc-ers. I can't give you a definite figure. phase for National Socialism at the time. After the war they would It was his job to maintain this section of track, which was frequently have done away with the church congregations anyhow. I oscillated attacked by partisans. They blew up the tracks so the trains would be back and forth between the Hitler Youth and the congregation. I was derailed. But the most important thing, the thing that had such a undecided and psychologically unfulfilled. I loved the Hitler Youth formative influence on him-which is why I'm here-and on me, was more and more. Religion became more and more unimportant to me. an experience he told me about after he returned. He came back I felt invigorated and full of life. They knew how to do that. Tl:e Hit- ear- lier than expected. There was a Jewish ghetto in Parafianovo. ler Youth leaders were good at animating young people, motivating A lot of Jews had been brought together and concentrated there in one area, and preparing them psychologically for tasks they would carry out where they were allowed to live. These Jews also worked for the Ger- later on. It went without question in my eyes that what the Fuhrer said man railroad. A large number were used to help maintain the tracks. and did, that was the truth. He was almost more of a god for me than For example, there was-I just can't forget their names-there the real God... was Aaron Katz, Maria, and the cook for the men my father worked with. B: Could you give an example of how the leaders did that? This cook was Jewish. I can't recall her name. I think Dolla was her R: We used to have evening get-togethers when all the boys would first name, or people called her that. My father could go into the sit in a large room. The room had black wallpaper, completely black. ghetto and speak with the Jews there. The benches were dark red. Up front there was a picture on the wall. Since he was a convinced and religious Christian, he also spoke with not of the Fiirer but of a famous Germanic king, along with two them about the Talmud and the Scriptures, our Holy Bible. And they lamps that shed a dim light on the picture. It was quite dark in the saw that they both believed in a common God, except that, for the room. Then we were told stories about the ancient Germans, our Ger- Jews, Jesus is a kind of strange chapter inserted in between. In any manic forefathers. The Aryan race, which has the sole right to lead. event, they understood that they were equal. And basically, we Ger- We would sing songs in a minor key. It penetrated very deeply into mans are also a tribe of Israelites. If you assume that certain tribes our souls. We felt this very deeply. We believed everything, and we were very proud to be members of this Germanic race and leaders to 1. Placenamesappear in their Russianform; theseare small villagesin Belorussia, boot. Young leaders, tribal leaders within this race, this new Germanic betweenVilna a,,d Smolensk. 204 Small Hills Covered with Trees Small Hills Covered with Rees 205 developed up north and that the Germanic tribes, the so-called Ger- a Sunday 'chool for children. Our parish servedin external and manic tribes, area coAglomerate of many peoples, they are also a tribe internal missionary activities in China. It wasmy favorite task to beinvolved of Israelites. Not that this is important, it's something secondary. [Very in service to children. Since I generally had a great many friends (through my work agitated]Well, the day arrived when the ghetto was surrounded by the with the children, the Party believed it had found the right man for its SS. They asked my father, "How many do you need?" And he told National Socialist Welfare Program (NS-Volkswohlfahrt, NSV) activities. At the them, "I need all of them." "No, I need a few heads:' the officer said, sametime I wasworking for the National Railways(Reichsbahn) "they're all to be shot:' So now you have this Christian. with a soft and and had a very low income. On the basisof my work as block he childlike heart. He stands there and can do nothing! What should chairman of the NSV and asan employeeof the Reichsbahn, I say, "Shoot me too"? He had children and a wife of his own ...What became a member of the National Socialist German Workers' was he to do? (Almost shoutingat me]He didn't have such great courage. PartyonJune 1,1941, He couldn't resist. He was unable to save hisJews-after all, they were I wasalso promised that I could retain my faith, but shortly his brothers, he had lived with them. First, a woman was shot. She had after I becamea member of the Party, I wasforbidden to hold given birth the day before. She was tossed down into the grave. Sunday school classes.That was the first blow. I had to keep silent and put aside [Crying] Whether they also shot the baby, he doesn't know, he didn't my favorite activity. I was transferred to the town know that. Then he ran away and cried bitterly. And a young SS sol- of Parafianovo in Poland to work as head of an auxiliary work squad on February 9. dier ran after him and said, "I can't go on either! I've killed so many, 1942. Among others, there were also some247 Jews-men, women, I jastcan't go on!" and children-living in the town. The Jewswere put to work at you a letter In any case, he was criticized after that. I could read all kinds of jobs but generally lived in a closed ghetto. WeGer- written by my father to make things clearer, a letter he wrote right mans (four men) were assigned a Jewish cook by the name of after the erd of the war. He became very ill and was released from Dolla, a sweetyoung girl with red hair, who wasvery, very clean. service too, following this experience. He wrote the letter only after My fellow soldiers did not treat her with mach respect, since she the war because he was afraid to put anything at all down in writing was.after all, Jewish. But she soon noticed that there wassome- during the war, during the National Socialist period. Let me show one there who treated her with love, and we becamefriends, though you. It's an old letter, and here is also the confirmation that my father no one wassupposed to notice. I becamesick one week, a bad cold, and Dolla called was in the east and had been given an early release. the Jewish pharmacist Belzik, who procured excellent medicines for me. My His hands shaking, Rudolf hands me the two documents he has brought fejlow soldiers began to taunt meabout this friendship with a Jew. and even started to with him. He is sweating. I can see that the documents are old and have critici-c and complain. When I regained my health, I visited the been carefully kept in a nylon bag. I can also see hat they are written in an ghetto for the first time. Visiting the ghetto wasforbidden and a old-fashioned hand and that on one, the words Our Guilt appearat the top. punishable offense. Due to my illness. I wasallowed to go to the Ioffer Rudolf a glass of waterand suggest that he read the documents to me pharmacy that waslocated in the ghetto. himself, since I would have difficulty with his father's handwriting. He SoI visited the pharmacist in the ghetto for the first time, and starts with the one that carries the swastika, a formal certificate of the Nazi I waspleased to meet several wonderful human beings: the Jew- railroadauthority. Then he reads his father's letter,dated May 16, 1945. ish women Maria (Mr. Belzik's daughter). Rita (a teacher), and Lilli (a piano teacher), as well as the Aaron K. family. These Our Guilt people proceeded to tell me all their cares and worries. I was Finally now, after many weeksof a serious illness that almost confronted with one tale of woe after another. These Jews, robbed me of my senses.I find myself able to commit to writing whether young or old, were eachgiven a ration of three hun- those things that (so soon) made me ill and have so completely dred grams of bread weekafter week. this and nothing else, shattered my nerves. I intend to narrate events one after the month after month. The great misery among thesepoor people other in the course of writing and to present a reason for having now becameevident to me. I then tried in every possible wayto chosen the above title. help them. and since I knew that they were God'sown people. I Until 19411 had been active for many years as the director of began to beseechhim and to help where I could. 206 Small Hills Covered with Trees Small Hills Covered with TRees 207

I wasvery happy whenwe werejoined bya new fellow soldier I went as fast as I could to my room. heard shots again and who shared my view,Mr. S. from Munich, who faithfully pitched again, and collapsed at the foot of my bed. Now I lost every. in. helping thesepoor people wherever help was needed. We thing. I had followed the Lord faithfully for twenty-eight years, had to go about it very cautiously and could only pay visits to and now this horrible thing occurred. I had believed right to the people late in the evening, though each time, the Jews were las! hour that the Lord would preserve these people asa result overjoyed when we came. I noticed, however,that their troubles of my prayer, but then I cursed God and all men. were growing from day to day, becauseeverywhere there was talk about Jews being shot. Their questions became ever more Rudolf stops again, burstinginto tears. pressing and urgent: What will become of us? I tried then to explain to them that the living Lord would not abandon them, I wanted total oblivion (ich wollte von nichts mehr wissen).Ap- and at home, in my room. I myself engaged in a fervent struggle parently abandoned byGod and all ef humankind, I carried out with God and asked him for he*?. Yes,in my distress I said, my duties in total apathy and hardly knew in subsequent days "Lord, I will serve you faithfully forever, but please let these what washappening. people live.' As a result of this terrible distress and misery, our My fellow soldiers-except for S.-called me a coward and a relationship became very, very close. It went sofar that we even "lover of Jews." Jewswere being shot everywhere, in Glubokoe, knelt down together to askour Father for strength in all these Dokshitsy Vileika, Budslav, and Krulevshchyzna. I had one matters. One evening, when I was visiting them again and we small consolation when I came to Dokshitsy ten or twelve days were all sitting together, I quietly sang the song "Guten Abend, later and met the captain. His first question was,"Where is gut' Nacht" [Brahms's Lullaby], accompanied on the guitar. Maria?" (Maria was the pharmacist's daughter in Parafipinovo, liked everywhere asa result of her When we came to the words "Tomorrow, God willing, you'll be universally respected love for awakened once again. , Rita broke out in sobsand said, "I human beings.) I said, "Maria isdead." The captain began to cry. feel so strange." The rest of what she said waslost in sobbing. He grabbed my hand and said, "It's a rotten shame" (Schwein- That wasthe last night of her young life. erei). I didn't seehim again after that, but I knew that his heart wasalso bleeding with grief. Eighteen hundred Jewshad been Rudolf is crying and searches desperatelyfor his handkerchiefwhile con- shot in this village. There wasgreat commotion and shouting. I tinuing to read. ran over to seewhat washappening, and to my horror I sawJews emerging from subterranean caves,some eighty to a hundrtd we suddenly heard that the ghetto was Early the next morning, people, a terrible picture of misery and suffering. They were the SS. The Jews were herded together and surrounded by crying for water, emac-..ted,their faceswhite aschalk. Hardly into an open area There they had to forced out of the ghetto able to utter a sentence, they dropped to their kneesand begged coats, and jackets, and they began to weep take off their shoes, for their lives. Without receiving anything, they were pushed tried to run awaybut wasshot loudly. A boy of about fourteen and herded into a barn. I watched asa girl about the ageoften, man became extremely an- immediately. In response, a Jewish who had hidden herself in a hay shed and wasnow almost com- wasbrutally beaten gry and began to rebuke the SS;however, he pletelyemaciated, was carried past me. This poor girl looked in a vehicle. The on the spot, so that he had to be transported more like a pile of bonesthan a human being, and this bundle hole, and every- men of the village were forced to dig a large of misery and agony, it too wascarried into the barn. Aslong as lie do" - one-children and women, young and old-had to I live, come what may, I will never forget this horrible sight. I there was face to the ground. Amoi-g these miserable creatures can't help myself. It wasjust too horrible and made mesick for a woman who only the day before ad given birth to a child. the rest of my life. I just can't comprehend how human beings go to her That woman was the first who had to stand up and can be such beasts.These images haunted me day and night. and grave (and the grave of all). I saw how this woman tottered After a few weeksI was sent to a field hospital in Vileika be. bitterly, reeled,clutching her almost naked infant and crying causeof hypertension. But then I collapsed completely, since I asking for her life. Shewas pushed brutally into the hole and wasnot allowed to tell anyone of my suffering. And this suffer- then shot. ing became even more intense when I realized that I wasa mem- Rudolf is unable to go on reading and sobs heavily. I am stunned, dis- ber of such a band of murderers and criminals, a band that tressed, and wait until he regains enough control over his tears to continue. would not have spared my life if I had objected. So I got sicker 208 Small Hills Covered with Trees Small Hills Covered with Trees 209

and sicker and was sent to Vilna. There, for the first time. I had just God in heaven, one who could give his blessing to such fainting spells and mental disturbances. They didn't know the bloody deeds. cause, and they asked me all kinds of questions, but I didn't tell On May 3 or 4 when he visited me I told Dr. S. about every- them a thing. since I couldn't trust anyone, including the doc- thing, particularly about Russia. And I can say that he cried bit- tors. After that I was released and sent home to Germany ac- terly and was ashamed of his ... [document illegible]. When I companied by a soldier, Back home my condition got worse, to asked him. "Can God ... " [document illegible], he replied reso- the point that I could hardly walk without someone to accom- lutely and with determination: 'Never" pany me, since I was suffering from the enormous weight of the I doubted God in Parafianovo, but ask him today for forgive- events I had experienced. After some time, I was reproached by ness. He was not on the side of those who perpetrated such in- the local section of the Party for not having (as they saw it) a justices, and he expiated those bloody deeds. National Socialist outlook on things. My general outlook was more religious in orientation than anything else. When I subse- R: So that is the end of the letter. That was the experience. And let quently wanted to talk about my experiences, I had to be so care- me tell you that this man suffered right up until the end, until he died, ful and cautious (pretending as if I thought this and not that) and if you want to know when that was, I can tell you. He's been dead that I became very sick and Dr. D. considered it advisable for me now some eight years. He wasn't able ... and was given early retire- to be placed in an institution. I was afraid they were going to get ment. He was a bit absentminded. But you must understand: the rid of me there. Shortly after this, I had to enter City Hospital thing that shaped anI molded me, what influenced me, was that I was for observation. It was there that I revealed all my suffering to unable to comprehend what my father was talking about. I had been explained everything to him. Dr. L. did not belong to Dr. L. and so fanatic about this idea of National Socialism ... But when he re- the Party. He understood me completely and advised me to try to forget things-something that was, and is, impossible. turned from Poland and told me these things-I was able to under- On April 14, 1945, 1 was suddenly approached by a man in stand various things by this time-I was unable to go on believing in the street, who came up to me and said, "We know who you are. it. A cause I was ready to sacrifice my life for-these people had done You've been undermining the work of the Party now for some such a thing? First I accused him of being a deserters I did not believe time. You're a dirty saboteur and that's going to cost you your his story, I could not believe it. [Agitatdj So then I was bothered by life!" I didn't know what was happening. What had I done? I doubts. What should I do? I was a leader in the Hitler Youth, but what took a few steps and must have collapsed on the spot. Witnesses should I do? I lived in a constant state of inner tension. I didn't know say I was going on as-out "common murderers, brown bandits, what I should do. Though I must say that in the course of time, that and shootings of Jews." People thought I was insane. I remained feeling disappeared, it dissipated. My father spoke less and less about in th's condition for several days. I had, in any case, been sick it, he withdrew more and more into himself. More and more, the only I was and unable to work since December 17, 1944, but now person he spoke to was my mother. He turned away from me, because completely fished. Dr. G. and Dr. S. were at my bedside. When I regained my senses a bit, I asked myself, "What have I done!" I was unwilling to take off that uniform. He turned away from me, I had confided in several families and told them about this and I could see that he was extremely ill, seriously so, because of it. crime in Russia. Whether they remained silent I don't know. In Yet I couldn't follow in his direction. But then there was an experi- addition, I had also not given away the presence of a man who ence that actually opened up once again the wound he caused in me had been living away from his unit for a year and a half, about by what he'd said. whom I was often questioned. I covered for him whenever I B: What was that? could. I couldn't allow him-someone who quite early on had R: Well, it was in '43 or '44 1 think. They showed the movieJud Stis. seen through all the lies-to fall into the hands of that pack, who It was a film against the Jews, but I didn't recognize it as an inflam- wanted to build a so-called "workers' paradise" on the blood and matory film. For me it was a simple fact: that's lowJews are. The film bones of the dead. portrayed them as the dregs of humanity. So there was this contradic- I can't understand that there are those who wish to kill me tion in my mind. There was "Jud Sikss" this carefully polished char- because of this, since anyone who has a fairly just view of things must admit that if we had won the war, then there couldn't be a acter in this horror film-that's the expression you coul-ause today- 210 Small Hills Covered with Trees Small Hills Covered withTrees 211 which destroyed young people spiritually and prepared them to... that I had been so blinded by this idea, that I had been led astray, something they could never vindicate: to pass judgment on a people I astray led again and again. But even what my father said to me-said to had never experienced directly or seen. (Gets up and walks around rest- me in tears, and I noticed that he was sick-even what he saidto Lessty]OK, I had seen some Jews with yellow stars. For me they were I didn't me, believe, so profound was the influence of the National Social- just people wearing a yellow star-the Poles had a P and the Ukraini- ists, of their propaganda. ans a U-for me these were second-class people. And I used to hear A long pause. Rudolf sits down and wipes hisforehead uith a handker- remarks, during those years you could hear again and again shouts of chief. "Jew.. Lousy Jewl " Criminals. "Vultures!" "Bloodsuckers!" Or And then I was apprenticed in 1944, 1 got an apprenticeship in "TheJews are responsible for the war!" TheJews were guilty of every- railroad, the the Reichsbahn. I wanted to bea locomotive engineer and in thing. There was nothing the Jews weren't responsible for. Then this '44, I was sent as an apprentice toa plant where locomotives were filmJud Siss was made. repaired. This plant had its own fire brigade, since such plants were I forgot one thing: Kristallnacht in 1938. 1 hadn't been a witness to often attacked and bombed during the war. Now because I was the that. I didn't see what happened, I only heard about it. I heard them only one who had been in a leadership position in the youth move- talking about a shoe store, a Jewish shoe store-I think itwas called ment-I was the only Hitler Youth leader among the sixty appren- Rosenthal's-and that it had been smashed and shoes were lying all ticed trainees-I was given the job of getting them to assemble in for- over the street. They carried out a child wrapped in a lamp shade. mation in the early morning; I had leadership status once again. I also Everything was gone, the Jews were gone. But those events occurred had t' nointhe fire brigade at the same time and went out with this on the periphery of things as far as I was concerned. At that time, for brigade a few times after heavy air raids. me the Jew was someone so small and inconsequential ... They I was involved during the last big raid-it was the end of '44 or the weren't an independent people, didn't have an independent state. beginning of '45, 1 can't remember There was a raid and we were Jews were nothingjust nothing. called out tosee what we could save. The buildings were on fire. And Once my father came to me and said, "Rudolf, Rudolf, listen" He then I saw something. As a young man, I was a runner, a messenger- noticed that we were drifting farther and farther apart. I was also we didn't have any radio equipment. I had to supervise the inspection aware that we were growing more and more distant. Then he said, of hoses, make sure the hoses were laid properly and weren't leaking. "Rudolf, we have to sit down and have a serious talk." That was during And I notice,! that under a hose lying on top of some debris, there the war, but at times he had very clear, sane moments (lichte Mo- was something dark red, shining there underneath. I said, "Mr. B."- mente). "We've talked so often about the Bible. You've read the Bible he was thechi-f at that time-"Mr. B., there's something over there!" yourself, and I've read both the Old and New Testaments. You know He had th:debris cleared away and I could seea woman lying there. that the Jewish people are in fact a people in their own right, God's She had run downstairs and out the front door, and a bomb had ex- chosen people. It is so and will remain that way. You can't, we can't ploded right in front of her. Shrapnel and a lot of debris went flying, deny that. No matter how many Christians curse them, the Jews are and this woman was killed. They lifted her out, and then I felt sick: .. e chosen people. The Jew is the hand on the clock of history: what- her lower body was ripped open, and everything inside came tum- ever happens to him, from that you can read the course of history and bling out. Now I had seen a great many dead people those months, time. Just remember one thing: if you lift a finger against the Jews, but this was the worst thing I'd witnessed. I started to feel sick, and you can cut off that finger because you are going to lose it! Never at- Mr. B. said to me. "OK, go on home," Well, that was the end of my tack a Jew. Be careful, cautious, and have respect for the Jews.' Then activity in the fire brigade. That was shordy before the end of the war. he told me a few more things from Jewish history, from the Old Tes- What I did after that was ... But I was no longer filled with such tament. After that I was filled with a sense of fear. He said to me, "Do conviction. Now I understood what my father had told me at the end: you believe in Jesus?" I said, "Yes, Dad, I do bclieve in Jesus Christ:' you can't justify and accept it. "But you know who he was, don't you?" and I said, "Yes, he was aJew, During the last halfhour, Rudolf has been very agitated,and Iactually right?" "OK, so do you believe in Jews now?" and I said, "Yes, Dad, I start to worry. But he wants to go on, as ifa hidden volcano has finally do. I'm sorry." And then I started to cry. I cried a lot. I was so sorry erupted. 212 Small HillsCovered with Trees Small Hills Covered with Rees 213 R: Though I must admit that I felt split and divided. After the therland in danger, your sons gather in around you. .7 And this was Americans marched in, people said. "Now the Hider Youth isfin- sung in a minor key, which makes you feel a bit melancholy, and it ished." I felt a certain sadness, not because of the fact that the Hitler would rouse our spirits. Then they would announce the promotion. Youth was done for, but because I was no longer able to meet all my Comrade so-and-so is now promoted to the rank of squad leader, ef- friends. That camaraderie was something I missed. fective as of such-and-such a date. They would pin on the special rib- Those were actually the main experiences. I wanted to tell you that, bon, and you'd go home through the streets swelling with pride. You well, that a family can be destroyed during a war by these things. My already felt like a young represent tative of National Socialism. father passed away, but before he died, he lived in a kind of twilight, a Later on-I have to say. not at that time but later on-I had this constant twilight, psychological and mental. He would only work with thought: What would have happened if my generation had been sent clay. He used to have this clay brought in and... Now I want to men- to carry out these murderous acts? OK, people were killed during air tion something that once again concerns those two religions'. where raids, but we never killed, we didn't get thiet far, thank God. But just you can see the schizophrenia... He had a board, and on this board imagine, what if this generation, which hid been psychologically he fashioned and shaped mountains and small hills covered with trained and geared up for it, what if this gene -ttion had been let loose trees. Down below, at the foot, he made a creche with Jesus lying there on mankind? Then what occurred with the Jews, why it would pale in inside, and there was a path that led up to a synagogue above. So he comparison-it would have been nothing. So that's what I have to tell wanted to make this connection (in his unconscious) between Chris- you: we would have been worse. We could have done it without any tianity and the Jews. He was unable to cope with the notion that a doubts whatsoever. fAgilated] We were trained to hate from a very Christian had been able to do such things against a Jew. In his state of early age. mental twilight, he wanted to restore this connection. And he died B: Did you have any friends at school who were Jewish, or were with that. He didn't die as a Christian or as a Jew: he was something there any Jeyjs in your school? in between. R: No, no, none. Wait a second, there was one: she was half-Jewish. In front of me I see the son of a, exceptionalfather,the only p, rson I've I started school in 1936, and there was a girl-we didn't know this at heard of who lost his mind because he could not go on living a normal life first-who was Ealf-Jewish. She told me after the war that they had- after he witnessed the massacre ofJews. I hug Rudolf and thank him for I was no longer at that school then-that the other children had talking with me. As we walk out, he says that he has never told anyone about stripped her naked in the street, because they heard she was half- it before, but when he saw the ad in the newspaper, he knew the time had Jewish. Even young children had been indoctrinated to the point come to bring hisfather's letter out into the open, to tell hisfather's story- where they could pull the clothes off a classmate and shout, "JewlJewl which s now his own. Jewl" She told me this after the war. She still lives here. She's married to an Englishman. She said she wouldn't want to marry a German. We arrangeto meet again afew days later.Rudolf arrives with two heavy And there was something here in town, not very long ago, at the folders in which he has carefully collected the songs from his days in the zoo. I don't know whether you heard about it. There's a large hall at Hitler Youth. He looks more relaxed,ready to go on. the zoo where meetings are held, and it was hired out by the police. R: I had certain other experiences in the Hitler Youth that were The police had a celebration there, and a police officer, who was func- especially memorable and important for me-for example, when I tioning as a kind of master of ceremonies, said, "What do you answer " was promoted. Those were moments when my soul was lifted up to 'Sieg'?" And a few young men shouted, 'Heil'!" That was the salute again. They'd make a campfire in the evening, although it was prohib- the Nazis used to use. The policeman really didn't mean any harm by ited on account of the air raids, but they would let us know: OK, no it, I know that. They had all been drinking a litde... But this Jewish enemy aircraft in sight. Promotions were usually announced on Hit- woman was there and she filed a complaint against the policeman. He ler's birthday, April 20, and on November 9.2It was all done in a very was temporarily suspended from service, and then there was -nme military atmosphere, with torches and songs ...[Singing] "Holy Fa- sort of punishment. I don't know exactly how it turned out. Anyhow, 2. November9 markedthe anniversaryof thefailed 1923Munich Pun.ch; it was a it was in the paper. She was a classmate of mine. Her brother and sacredday on the National Socialist calendar. father-or her brother and mother, one of them died before that- 214 Small Hills Covered with Trees Small Hills Covered with Trees 215 were murdered in the camps. Aside from that, I had no other classmates. Jewish tration camp as a Communist, There weren't any left. It is astonishing, but I didn't and he always stressed the fact that he ally have actu- wasn't a Nazi. He said any direct experience of Jews being sent to concentration this spontaneously, even though the Nazis were camps. I didn't in power. And I told him, 'Just know about it. I only knew that Jews had to you wait, I won't forget this!" Now that yellow star-I wear a tiny seed began to sprout. It was knew that later on-a yellow star. They were marked still very small. But if it had grown, I and singled out so that probably would have turned out to be you could recognize them as Jews. Though I one of those who could have must emphasize again and again, killed someone for saying such a thing... it was also true for the Poles, the [Sas Ukrainians ... it wasn't down again, trying to calm himself] I recall that when I anything... leader was a B: After your father told you his story, in the Hitler Youth, I ...in Germany we have people did you ever discuss it with you who, as friends? would say in slang, are "brown noses:' people who want to, trouble, make R: I wasn't able to discuss it with my friends. Well, I loved to go around dressed in my uniform. I even That would have en- went to dangered my father. school in uniform, to work-I was very proud. And at that B: What happened time Russian civilian laborers weren't between you and your friends after your father allowed to drink any alcohol. came back? Then an incident occurred that I have to tell you about. There this Russian was R: Actually, there was no break, no rupture civilian laborer. I was out with a lot of boys, and this between me and my drunken Russian friends. I think you have to view it in this way: laborer came along. I asked him, "Where are you the overriding, all- coming from?" Me, embracing concept was the Hitler Youth. National just a child. And he stammered something in his Socialism was a drunken stupor. I said, "Do phenomenon that accompanied this organization. Only you want to have a fight?" He said, "Yeah." scious in a subcon- So I slugged him. He smashed way was all this hammered into us: National Socialism his face into the big window of a gro- Adolf and cery store. There ,,as a pointed Hitler. Basically, in terms of our behavior, we remained grille covering it, and his whole face children, young was cut and scratched. No one did anything only that, via our subconscious, they attempted to to me. though. After all, us for the prepare they couldn't hit me. If anyone had done later phase. After all, we were still immature, still under such a thing to me while I age of eighteen. the was wearing that uniform, he'd have ended You couldn't get rid of our childlike character. That up in a concentration was something that remained. camp. Terrible, right? Anyhow, my father found out about this inci- dent Maybe I should tell you about and he gave me the worst spanking I ever had. He really wal- one more experience. I told you that loped I was a trainee with the Reichsbahn, me! It was the right punishment. But, as I said before, the small and that I was a youth leader seed there. I wasn't all that good as a had started to germinate, to grow and sprout: "I won't forget student, and I wasn't the best among that, the apprentices, but I was the leader. you'll see!" "You Russian, listen, you're not worth a damn thing! So we young guys-you can see I can do something from this just how young we still were-we to you, even though I'm much smaller, and you got up on a hill during can't defend yourself, you recess and started throwing stones, as boys can't do anything!" sometimes like to do, a Rudolf is in a kind of He kind of game. There were two sides, two groups, trance. is staring at the ceiling, trying to bring and we were throw- out the memories that have ing stones at each other. The winner was supposed plagued his conscience all these years. I listen to get a bottle of carefully, wishingI had tofilm soda water or something. So I heaved a heavy a camera this interview. The stories continue stone and hit a boy right to pourforth, however disjointedly, in the stomach. He got really angry, and one after another. he shouted, "You goddamn R: Then there was Nazi pig!" And that was during the war! this Frenchman ...My uncle lived between I ran over to him and said, Brandenburg and Berlin, "What did you say?" "You goddamn Nazi pig!" Whammo, and he had a fruit farm-he made a living I gave him growing strawberries, apples, and tomatoes-and a left and right to the nose, and he dropped to the a Russian, a Pole, a ground. Then I Serb, a Frenchman ...these were the told him, "Just you wait. I won't forget this." I told this people who had to work for kid, "You watch him. Early in the morning there was the out!" Now what comes is like the seed that has been sown "funeral procession." That's in a child what we called it. There was this old German soldier and begins sprouting unconsciously ... [Stands up and walks who could hardly aroundthe stand on his legs, and he led the French POWs off room waving his arms] I threw a stone at him and hurt him, he to the various fruit felt pain farms. And when they would pass a farm where and shouted at me, "You Nazi pig!" His father had been in a concen- one of them worked, he'd leave the group and go on in. They walked very slowly, took a lot 216 Small Hills Covered with Trees Small Hills Covered with TRes 217 of time, this German soldier and that French POW. Once I spoke with The flag, the people-they the Frenchman, whose German was rather were everything. You are nothing, your good. I was actually quite people everything. surprised that I didn't react Yes, that's how children were brought up. that's differently. We were sitting together be- how you can manipulate tween the rows of strawberries, a child... and he told me something about Ins He attitude toward the is singing, talking, and crying, shifting back andforth between one German people and National Socialism. I let him memory and another. talk and didn't react at all, although I was very bothered by what that Frenchman was saying. He said, "P4y attention to your own history, We meet again a year later Rudolf is willing to be interviewed the history of Germany. Don't always go on on video- carping about the Jews, tape: he will do it for me,for the researchforhumanity. the French (because the French had been our When he reads his a; -ntenemies). Just take father's letter during the filming at the studio, a long, sober look at your own history, without rose-colored he cries again, and thisme glasses. too, he does not seem able to find his handkerchief Take your history as it really is, what really happened, and then form We walk out together when the taping session an opinion. How much hatred do you Germans have in yourselves? is over, and I thank himfor coming. He tells me that his own children did not want him to How far do you expect to go with it? How many Tpore do you plan to come. They exterminate in the name of this hatred?" do not want to have anything to do with this chapter of the family past. Their motto is "past is past." They want So, as you can see, that idea stayed with me, what he said, though I a life of their own. Outside the studio, we shake hands warmly, myself was deeply indoctrinated. OK, if you place all these little piles and Rudolf walks slowly away into the darkness. I suddenly of impressions one next to the other, you can understand my reac- realize how lonely he must be, carrying his father's letter: tion-the way I experienced it later on, the way I reacted to myself. I "Our Guilt." almost felt like Judas in the Bible, that disciple who committed sui- cide. Yes, well, more than that I ...I have such a modest heart, wouldn't harm a fly...But they had swelled up my heart. They were able to deform a person's heart. Then the war ended. If it hadn't ended, I don't know, I'm not sure I would have forgotten all that. I mean, it's especially easy to manipu- late children at that age, and where you can get at the children, that's where-at least this is what I think-that's the history of the people. If you can drill the notion into their heads: you are from a tribe, a race that is especially valuable. And then you tell them something about the Germanic tribes, their loyalty, their battles, how Germanic women let themselves be hitched up to carts to fight against theRomans. You, you're -.child of this race. a people that dealt the Romans a destructive blow in the year 9 A.D.,all that sort of thing. Then there were the songs. I'm especially affected by songs. When they would sing those songs glorifying the deeds of the Germanic tribes, such as [singing] "The sons of the people ride on silvery stallions, born from a divine multitude, warrior of the Nordic people, they ride in silence tothe far fields of the northern lights, on secret paths they greetelves at the shore of the pounding sca."Or "Holy Fatherland. your sons crowd iii around you."How does itgo on? "What we swear is writer,in the stars, he who directs the stars will hear our v',ice ...before the for- eigner robs you of your crussn, 0 Germany, we would prefer to fall side by side." Or "Tae flag is dearer than death." Death was nothing. Dr. Milton, I apologize for the delay. Please proceed. Thank you for being with us this afternoon. Ms. MILTON. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, it is a great honor to testify before this committee concerning the Wann- see Conference of January 20, 1942. I am appearing before you as the resident historian of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council. My statement will focus on the events of Wannsee and their implica- tions. The discussion at Wannsee forms one link in the chain that led from discrimination to genocide. Unlike many such interagency meetings, the Wannsee Conference has acquired notoriety because the American prosecution discovered a copy of the protocol and used it at Nuremberg. The registration, selection, and roundup of Jews for mass murder required the cooperation of various govern- ment agencies, together with the SS and police. The cooperation of the railroads to transport Jews to killing centers in the East, or of the finance office to collect their property, required only technical coordination and could thus be settled in direct talks between the security police and the involved agencies. More complex legal and administrative issues, however, required consultation among various ministries, such as the interagency meeting coordinating the "final solution" held at Wannsee. Despite the jirim subject, the protocol shows a typical bureaucratic meeting of 15 senior government and Nazi party officials. In addition to the SS and police, the following agencies were present and represented: foreign affairs; interior; justice; economics-in Nazi Germany the 4- Year Plan; the occupied eastern territories; the party chancellery; the Reich chancellery; and the General Government (Poland). Eight of the 15 participants had doctorates; 6 were lawyers. Contrary to popular myth, the conference did not decide or even launch the "final solution." At the conference, after Reinhard Hey- drich, who chaired and convened the conference, provided an over- view of the plan to kill the Jews, and the participants discussed numbers and procedures, the discussion focused on the legal and political problems posed by part-Jews and by Jews in mixed mar- riages. Various options, including mass sterilization and forced di- vorce, were suggested. The conference resulted in increasing inter- agency cooperation, although the vexing problems of part-Jews and mixed marriages were never fully solved. The logistics of transportation for the deportation of all Europe- an Jews were discussed at Wannsee and thereafter implemented by effectively utilizing existing agencies and procedures. The statisti- cal table included in the Wannsee protocols reveals that Nazi plans were nearly unlimited in-scope, and even projected the deportation and killing of Jews from Britain and also from neutral countries, such as Switzerland, Sweden, Portugal, and Turkey. It also revealed the expansion of Nazi racial practice to the part- Jewish population and their Christian relatives, estimated as con- sisting of at least 100,000 persons in Germany. The Wannsee protocol is also an extreme example of the ability of civil servants to hide the truth behind evasive language. Thus, code words like "final solution," "evacuation," "resettlement," and "natural decline" are found throughout the protocol. These euphe- misms were used by senior government officials, men of experience and education. This enables us today to explore the language used to disguise German Government policies and to recognize the extent to which government agencies, departments, and individual citizens were involved in implementing the killing of their Jewish compatriots and other targeted groups throughout occupied Europe. It is important to remember that the decision to commit mass murder as well as the implementation of that decision was top secret. The leaders and bureaucrats realized that the German people, even members of the Nazi Party, might not accept such radical evil if it were publicly announced and documented. They would accept rumors about killing, but not official announcements and pictures. For these reasons, German bureaucrats used euphe- misms and classified as top secret all documents, photographs, and films about Nazi genocide. We must therefore realize that all un- necessary government secrecy poses dangers in a free society and that a free press is essential in a democracy. It is interesting to consider the postwar fate of those attending the Wannsee meeting. Five of the participants died before 1945. A sixth was never accounted for. Four participants were arrested and interrogated by the United States prosecution at Nuremberg. Two of them were convicted by a U.S. tribunal but were soon released because of amnesties. Only one individual admitted participating in the Wannsee Conference, nor did he deny knowing about the mass murder of European Jews. Three participants were tried and exe- cuted by British, Polish, and Israeli tribunals. Two others were sub- ject to postwar German judicial investigations, but were never in- dicted or brought to trial. The Wannsee Conference has become the symbol of planned bu- reaucratic extermination. It is also an event with broader ramifica- tions, refining our understanding of administrative processes in Nazi Germany and the intent of government policies. It enhances our recognition of the importance of individual decisionmaking and responsibility within any bureaucracy, providing evidence of the chilling neutrality of experts and high government officials whose lack of protest resulted in mass murder. But today we all know the German bureaucrats realized the con- nections between their paperwork and the mass murder and ra- tionalized or denied their participation in these events after the war. Thank you very much for your time and attention. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you, Doctor, very much. [Prepared statement of Ms. Milton follows:] 48

TESTIMONY OF SYBIL MILTON, RESIDENT HISTORIAN OF THE UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL COUNCIL, BEFORE THE ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, FEBRUARY 5, 1992

It is a great honor to testify before this Committee concerning the Wannsee Conference of 20 January 1942. I am appearing before you as the Resident Historian of the United States Holocaust Memorial Council. My statement is based on my expertise as a historian specializing in Nazi Germany and the Holocaust. I will focus on the events of the Wannsee Conference and their implications.

The discussion among senior civil servants of the German government and the Nazi party, including several state secretaries, at a lakeside villa in suburban Berlin located at Am Grossen Wannsee, on 20 January 1942, forms one link in the chain that led from discrimination to genocide. Unlike many other such interagency meetings, the Wannsee Conference has acquired notoriety because the American prosecution discovered a copy of the protocol and used it at Nuremberg.

The Wannsee meeting was called by Reinhard Heydrich, chief of the Secur;ty Police and the SS Security Service, who had been appointed by Hermann GOring in late July 1941 as plenipotentiary for the "final solution of the Jewish qiustion in the German sphere of influence in Europe." Previously, competing government and party agencies had pursued independent anti- Jewish policies. With the coming of war, however, Hitler assigned the killing operations that then commenced to specific agencies. In fact, Hitler assigned the first such killing enterprise in 1939, that directed against the disabled and known by the euphemism euthanasia, to his own Chancellery of the F~ihrer. Subsequently, he undoubtedly assigned the job of killing the Jews to Heinrich Himmler, the Reich Leader SS and-Chief of the German Police. Some- time in late 1940 or early 1941, Hitler, together with Himmler and others, made a policy decision that sealed the fate of European Jews, and the actual killings commenced with the invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941.

The registration, selection, and roundup of Jews required the cooperation of various -government agencies with the SS and police. The cooperation of the railroads to transport Jews to killing centers in the East or of the finance offices to collect their property required only technical coordination, and could thus be settled in direct talks between the security police and the involved agencies. More complex legal and administrative issues, however, required -onsultation among various ministries. This type of consultation usually involved interagency meetings. The meeting at Wannsee, chaired by Heydrich, %as one such interagency coordinating session.

Despite the grim subject, the protocol shows a typical bureaucratic meeting of fifteen senior government officials. In addition to the SS and police, the following :iincies were represented: foreign affairs, interior, justice, econom- ics (-our Year Plan), occiipied eastern territories, party chancellery, Reich 49

-2-

chancellery, and the General Government (Poland). Eight of the fifteen partici- pants had doctorates; six participants were lawyers.

Contrary to popular myth, the Wannsee Conference did not "decide" or even launch the "final solution." By late January 1942, when the meeting was convened, the mass murders of European Jews and Gypsies had already started. After June 1941, mass killing operations had spread to include Jews and Gypsies in the occupied Soviet Union. On occupied Soviet soil, the killing operations did not pose major political or logistical problems; there the victims were simply rounded up for mass executions in open pits, as for example at Babi Yar in the Ukraine in September 1941. Further, the killing center at Chelmno was set up in Poland in November 1941; Jews and Gypsies who had been deported to the Lodz ghetto in the second half of October and early November 1941 were quickly killed at Chelmno in mobile gas vans using carbon monoxide by late December 1941. Moreover, the first experiments with Zyklon 1i (crystalline hydrocyanic acid) had already taken place at Auschwitz before the Wannsee Conference was held.

At the conference, alter Heydrich provided an overview of the plan to kill the Jews and the participants discussed numbers and procedures, the discussion focused on the legal und political problems posed by part Jews and by Jews in mixed marriages. Various options, including mass sterilization and forced divorce, were suggested. Although the participants reached tentative agree- ment, they did decide that these matters involved policy decisions that only the Fijhrer could resolve.

However, the Wannsee Conference did result in increased interagency coopera- tion, although the vexing problems of part Jews and mixed marriages were never fully solved. The logistics of transportation for the deportation of all European Jews was discussed at Wannsee and thereafter implemented by effec- tively utilizing existing bureaucratic structures. This raises for us today important questions about individual decision making and responsibility within a bureaucracy that demanded obedience to procedures and chains of command. The statistical table included in the Wannsee protocol reveals that Nazi plans were unlimited in scope, and even projected the deportation and killing of Jews from Britain and from neutral countries - Switzerland, Sweden, Portugal, and Turkey. It also revealed the expansion of Nazi racial practice to the part- Jewish populace and their Christian relatives, estimated as consisting of at least 100,000 persons in Germany.

Furhermore, the Wannsee protocol confirmed decisions reached in October 1941 that' the fortress town of Theresienstadt, located in occupied Bohemia, was to become the temporary destination for deported elderly German and Austrian Jews en routt to the East, for decorated Jewish war veterans of World War I, and for those in privileged mixed marriages or with special connections. The gh ltto at Theresienstadt was part of a deadly deception that would serve to hide the radical nature of these deportations and of Nazi plans from the German populace and home front.

The Wannse protocol is also art extrote example of the ability of civil ser- vants to hide the truth behind evasive language. Thus, code words like "final -3-

solution" were used instead of killing, "evacuation" and "resettlement" re- placed the word deportation, and "natural decline by forced labor" meant prolonged and barbaric death by compulsory labor, exposure, and starvation. These circumlocutions and euphemisms were used by senior government offi- cials, men of experience and education. This enables us today to explore the language used to disguise German government policies and to recognize the extent to which government agencies, departments, and individual citizens were involved in implementing the killing of their Jewish compatriots and other targeted groups throughout occupied Europe.

It is important to remember that the decision to commit mass murder, as well as the implementation of this decision, was top secret. The leaders and bureaucrats realized that the German people, even members of the Nazi party, might not accept such radical evil if it were publicly announced and docu- mented. They would accept rumors about killings but not official announce- ments and pictures. For these reasons, German bureaucrats used euphemisms and classified as top secret all documents, photographs, and films about Nazi genocide. We should therefore remember that all unnecessary government sec- recy poses dangers in a free society and that a free press is essential in a democracy.

It is interesting for us to consider the postwar fate of those attending the Wannsee meeting. Five of the participants had died or been killed before 1915. Reinhard Heydrich was fatally wounded by Czech partisans in May 1942. Dr. Roland Freisler of Justice died in an Allied air raid on Berlin. Dr. Rudolf Lange, Commander of the Security Police and SS Security Service in Latvia, died in combat. martin Luther of the Foreign Office died in a Berlin hospital. Dr. Alfred Meyer, State Secretary of the Ministry for Occupied Eastern Terri- tories, committed suicide. A sixth participant, Heinrich M(iller, who headed the Gestapo, disappeared at the end of the war and his fate remains unknown, al- though it is believed that he perished during the siege of Berlin.

Four Wannsee participants (Dr. Wilhelm Stuckart, State Secretary of Interior; Otto Hofmann, head of the SS Central Office for Race and Settlement; Friedrich Wilhelm Kritzinger of the Reich Chancellery; and Erich Neumann, State Secre- tary for the Four Year Plan) were arrested and interrogated by the United States prosecution at Nuremberg. Neumann was not indicted, and Kritzinger died before he could be tried. Stuckart and Hofmanr were convicted by a United States Military Tribunal, but were soon released under various Ameri- can amnesties. Only Kritzinger ever admitted participating in the Wannsee Conference and did not deny knowing about the mass murder of European Jews.

Five other Wannsee participants were the subject of postwar judicial investi- gations by other nations. Three were tried and sentenced. Dr. Eberhard Schdngarth, Senior Commander of the Security Police and SS Security Service in Cracow at the time of Wannsee and later appointed in the same capacity in the Netherlands, was captured by the British, tried by military court, and executed in 1946. Dr. Josef Bijhler, deputy head of the General Government, was sentenced to death by a Polish court and executed in 1948. Adolf Eich- mann, the Gestapo's expert on Jewish deportation and head of Department I %R4 51

-4-

of the Central Office for Reich Security (RSHAI, who admitted preparing the Wannsee protocol, was triedtd--s-itnced by Israel and taung in 1962 in Jerusalem. Both Dr. Gerhard Klopfer of the party chancellery and Dr. Georg Leibbrandt of the Ministry for Occupied Eastern Territories were subject to German postwar judicial investigations, but were never indicted or brought to trial.

Although our documentation and knowledge of the Wannsee Conference has grown enormously since Nuremberg, it is clear that the record surrounding the conference is still fragmentary. The Wannsee Conference has become the symbol of planned bureaucratic extermination. It is also an event with broader ramifications, raising the need to question and explore the language and eLphemisms that disguise the real intent and results of government policies and also enhancing our recognition of the importance of individual decision- making and responsibility within an) bureaucracy. Thus, the broadest legacy of the Wannsee Conference as one aspect of the Holocaust is to provide us with information about the structure, processes, and patterns of government institutions and decisions. It also provides evidence of the chilling neutrality of experts and high government officials, whose lack of protest resulted in mass murder. By studying the Holocaust as a whole, we also learn to analyze administrative planning and the training and education of specialized person- nel. But today we all know that German bureaucrats realized the connections between their paper work and mass murder and rationalized or denied their participation in these events after the war. The educational mission of the United States Holocaust Memorial Council and Museum obviously includes consideration of these subjects and their implications.

SOURCES

Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem, rev. en). ed. (New York: Viking, 1964), pp. 112-34.

Kurt Pitzold and Erika Schwarz, Tagesordnung: Judenmord; DIeWannsee- Konferenz am 20. Januar 1942. Eine Dokumentation zur rganisation der Endl6sunx (Berlin: Metropol, 19921.

Johannes Tuchel, Am Grossen Wannsee 56-58: Von der Villa Minoux zum Haus der Wannsee-Konfere-nz (Berlin: Edition Hentrich, 1992).

Robert Wolfe, ed., The Wannsee Protocol, vol. 11 of the series edited by John Mendelsohn, The _Holocaust: Selected Documents in Eighteen Volumes (New York: Garland, 1982). Mr. KOSTMAYER. Mr. Rosenfeld. Mr. ROSENFELD. Mr. Chairman, Members of the committee, it is an honor to testify before this committee today. I have, like the other witnesses, presented written testimony. I would like to add the following. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Without objection, your testimony will be made a part of the record, Mr. Rosenfeld. Mr. ROSENFELD. Thank you, sir. My testimony is based on my experiences and observations as an American journalist covering the trial of Adolf Eichmann in Jeru- salem in 1961 for NBC News and for the New York Herald Trib- une. The Israel Government was obviously most concerned about Eichmann's security, his personal security. In the 11 months be- tween his capture and the beginning of his trial, Eichmann was held in solitary confinement in a highly secure prison. Partly as a result of this, there was a great deal of curiosity about him. After all, here was a man accused of horrendous crimes against humanity. When he finally appeared in court, it was some- thing of an anticlimax. Eichmann was a small, pale, insignificant man, self-effacing, hesitant, certainly not the mythical German "superman." His attitude toward the court was solicitous and anx- ious. When he testified, he was never defiant; he was, instead, apol- ogetic. He explained that he never really had anything against the Jews, he rather liked them. And he claimed that he did not believe that mass murder was the solution to what he and his fellow Nazis called the "Jewish problem." He preferred forced emigration." "But," he said, orders were orders." And when Heydrich told him half a year before the Wannsee Conference that Hitler had ordered, and I quote, "the physical ex- termination of the Jews," Eichmann told his Israeli interrogators that he did not respond in any way. He did not say anything be- cause-again I quote-"There was nothing to say anymore." His boss had- told Adolf Eichmann that the German state was going to kill all the Jews of Europe, and Eichmann's response was to say nothing. Eichmann's testimony concerning the Wannsee Conference throws a revealing light on his character and that of the other par- ticipants in the conference. These other men were mainly senior of- ficials in government ministries who had risen to responsibility through the ranks of the civil service, and not through the ranks of the Nazi Party. They were well educated. A number of them had doctoral degrees. According to ELihmann, however-and not however, as a matter of fact-Heydrich expected the greatest difficulties from such a well-educated group of civil servants, not Nazi Party officials. But that simply didn't happen; there were no difficulties. Eich- mann testified at his trial that, even though all these men knew that the phrase "final solution" meant mass murder of millions of people, not one of the participants objected. No one protested. Rather, they discussed details, practical matters of implementation of the "final solution." Eichmann was impressed by his meeting with these people. The meeting, he testified, and again I quote, "was conducted quietly," he said, "with much courtesy, much friendliness, and much polite- ness. There was not much talk, and it did not last long." And if these high-ranking civil servants had agreed to the "final solution," Eichmann reasoned, who was he to object? He told the court, and this became at that time a rather famous statement, "I felt like Pontius Pilate, able to disclaim all guilt. I could say of myself that no fault lay with me, that I was guiltless, the decisions at this Wannsee Conference were taken by the highest in the land, by the popes of the State. As for me, I had only to obey. I have pondered this," Eichmann went on, "for many years since then, and herein I saw my justification for my actions." This was, I think we will all recognize, a classic example of the plea of "superior orders." And in January 1992, only a couple of weeks ago, all these years after the Eichmann trial, it was chilling for ine to read that exactly the same argument, the same excuse, the excuse of "I was just following orders," was used by the defense in the trial of two former East German border guards accused of shooting to death a young man trying to flee across what was then the Iron Curtain in Berlin. Chilling indeed. Thank you. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you very much. [Prepared statement of Mr. Rosenfeld follows:] TESTIMONY OF ALVIN ROSENFELD, CONSULTANT TO THE UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL COUNCIL, BEFORE THE ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, FEBRUARY 5, 1992

It is a great honor to testify before this Committee concerning the Wannsee Conference of 20 January, 1942. I testify in my role as an expert consultant to the Uniteo States Holocaust Memorial Council. My testimony is based on my experiences and observations as a journalist covering the trial of Adolf Eichnann in Jerusalem in 1961.

As the resident correspondent of NBC News and the New York Herald Tribune I reported to the American reading and listening public on Prime Minister David Ben Gurion's statement to the Knesset (Parliament) in May 1960 that Eichmann "is under arrest in Israel and will shortly be put on trial." Eichmann had, in fact, been apprehended by Israeli agents in Argentina and brought surreptitiously to Israel. Over the next eleven months I reported on the careful preparations for the Eichmann trial and wrote many reports on the background of the German campaign to eliminate the Jews of Europe. When the trial finally began in April 1961 -before a court made up of three justices of the Supreme Court, I reported on the the testimony for NBC together with Martin Agronsky and for the New York Herald Tribune together with the late Robert S. Bird. Later, I reported on Eichmann's appeal of the guilty verdict to a panel made up of five justices of the Supreme Court headed by the Chief Justice.

Covering the trial in all its complexity was not only a professional challenge but also a trauma for me and indeed for all of the dozens of journalists who came from round the world to report on this remarkable event. This was particularly so because of a factor not generally understood today. In the years after World War II the world had largely forgotten the Holocaust in its rush to rebuild and to seek normalcy while, at the same, waging the Cold War. The very word "Holocaust" was not used to describe the mass murder of the Jews of Europe. There were very few history books or memoirs about this tragedy. Even in Israel knowledge of the Holocaust was spotty. The tens of thousands of Holocaust survivors who had reached Israel after the war were, by 2 and large, still recovering from the shock and largely silent about their experiences.

Thus, the Israeli government saw the Eichmann trial not only as the trial of a single human being on fifteen counts of "crimes against the Jewish people," "crimes against humanity" and "war crimes" but also as a solemn educational endeavor. The goal was, while giving Eichmann a meticulously fair trial, to spread out the full facts of the Holocaust from the Nazi ascent to power in 1933 to the war's end in 1945. The goal was to provide these facts to two important audiences -- the peoples of the world and the people of Israel, and among the latter particularly the young people with little sense of history and the immigrants from the countries of Asia and Africa with little direct knowledge of the Holocaust. In addition, of course, the trial would provide an accounting for history of the full story of the Holocaust. As a result, in those long months building up to the trial, the Israeli prosecution, led by the Attorney General, carried out a truly momumental task of research. And the trial itself focused not only on Eichmann but also on the work of the full bureaucratic and military machine of the Third Reich in the persecution and mass murder of European Jews. Thus, every day, the journalists covering the trial endured riveting and emotion- draining testimony of horror piled upon horror.

Of course, the principal task was to lay bare the work of Adolf Eichmann. Who was he? He was not impressive. He was a small, pale man, in manner ungainly and hesitant. His answers to questions were stiff, formal, often apologetic. He projected himself as a stickler for rules and regulations. Eichmann had been poorly educated. Born in Austria in 1906, he did not complete high school, nor did he complete a course in mechanics at a vocational school in which he had enrolled. He became a traveling salesman for an oil company but was dismissed from that job. In 1932, at the age of 27, he joined the Austrian National Socialist Party and then joined the SS. When the SS was banned in Austria in 1933, he moved to Germany where the Nazis were in power and volunteered to work in the central office of the SD, the Security Service. He thus began a career of persecution, serving for a time at the Dachau concentration camp. In 1935, he was assigned to a new intelligence sectiorr, the Jewish section, and his life's work truly began. In 1937 he went to Palestine and Egypt on a fact-finding mission in connection with Germany's efforts to rid itself of the Jews and in 1938, after Austria was incorporated into the Reich, he was sent to Vienna to organize the forced emigration of the Jews. Later, when Czechoilokavia was taken over by Germany, he organized a similar effort in Prague, establishing a Central Office for Jewish Emigration. In September 1939, after Germany invaded Poland and the world conflict began, Heinrich Himmler created the RSHA, the 56

.3

Reich Security Main Office (RSHA), incorporating the various secret services under Reinhard Heydrich. Eichmann became head of the Gestapo's Jewish Section, which came to be known as Section IV B 4.

Eichmann, the trial demonstrated again and again, was the supreme bureaucrat. He did not set policy. But he implemented it with ingenuity, with great zeal and with cruel efficiency. And he even volunteered proposals to his superiors as to how to solve "the Jewish question.' When policy called for forced emigration, he worked to strip the Jews of Austria and Czechoslovakia of their possessions, leaving them with virtually no alternative but to emigrate. When the war made forced emigration difficult and then virtually impossible, he worked on plans to concentrate the Jews in huge ghettos, in PMland and even in Madagascar. And when policy changed, and orders came to transport the Jews by the hundreds of thousands to the East for destruction, Eichmann threw himself into this effort. He became a transport officer par excellence, making sure the trains to the killing centers were filled to overflowing, the schedules maintained despite all the problems of a wartime economy.

He knew precisely wi-at this meant. He testified to his Israeli interrogators that, some weeks after Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June 1941, ha was summoned to a meeting with Heydrich of the RSHA and told, 'The Fuhrer has ordered the physical extermination of the Jews.* Eichmann went on to report, "In the first moment I was unable to grasp the significance of what he had said, and then I understood, and didn't say anything, because there was nothing to _ay any more." Further, Eichmann was sent to the East on an inspection tour and saw the gruesome work of the killing squads. He told his interrogators that he was nauseated, but if so that did not deter him from carrying out his assigned work.

The story of the Wannsee Conference was, of course, a crucial element in the trial. Eichmann had prepared materials and statistics for Heydrich's opening statement at this conference to coordinate the "final solution." He had drafted the invitations. He attended the meeting and carefully wrote the protocol -- the minutes -- of the session, submitting them to Heydrich again and again for review. His testimony on the conference was most revealing, most chilling, as to his own personality and as to the character and values of the others who were in attendance.

Again, this was not a policy-setting meeting. It was a meeting called by Heydrich as head of the RSHA to assure the full cooperation of the governmental ministries involved in any way in the "final solution" as well as the cooperation of the senior civil service. Eichmann's protocol said the conference began with Heydrich's announcement that Reich Marshal Goering had appointed him as "delegate for the preparation for the final solution of the Jewish problem in Europe." The conference had been called "for the purpose of clarifying fundamental questions," the protocol added in paraphrase of Heydrich, and to assure "initial common action of all Central Offices immediately concerned with these questions in order to bring their general activities into line." The men invited to the conference were mainly senior civil ?ervants, high ranking in their individual ministries. They had risen to positions of responsibility and prestige through the ranks of the civil service and not through the ranks of the Nazi Party. They were well educated, a number of them had doctoral degrees. According to Eichmann, Heydrich "expected the greatest difficulties" from such a group. But that did not happen. Though the protocol used code words for murder, everyone knew what was meant. As Eichmann told the court, "The Reich had by then been six months at war with Russia, and, as we have seen from the documents, the operational groups (the Einsatzgruppen, or mobile killing squads attached to the army) were already in action in ... the war zone, and all these people, key men in the government of the Reich, must certainly have known what was happening." Later he testified that the participants in the meeting used not code words but quite specific terms. No one protested. Rather, they discussed details, practical matters of implementation of the policy of the "final solution" and the ticklish question as what to do with half Jews and quarter Jews.

Eichmann was impressed. In rank, upbringing, education, he was no match for the other participants. He recalled, "I took part for the first time in such a conference, with high officials present, like secretaries of state, and it was conducted quietly, with much courtesy, much friendliness and much politeness. There was not much talk, and it did not last long."

And if these high ranking civil servants agreed to the "final solution," Eichmann reasoned, who was he to object? As he told the court, "I felt like Pontius Pilate, able to disclaim all guilt. I could say to myself that no fault lay with me, that I was guiltless, the decisions at this Wannsee Conference were taken by the highest in the land, by the popes of the State. As for me, I had only to obey. I have pondered this for many years since then, and herein I saw my justification for my actions."

It was a classic example of the plea of superior orders, of the argument that "I was just following orders. How could I disobey?" The Israeli court, of course, eloquently and thoroughly rejected this argument, this plea of the bureaucrats and implementors of death, but it is an insidious argument that arises whenever atrocities are committed.

After the business meeting ended, there were drinks. Eichmann had the honor of sitting with the great Heydrich and with his Gestapo 58

boss, Mueller, at the fireplace. They did not "talk shop but enjoyed some rest after long hours of work." Heydrich drank cognac. And there was lunch. In Eichmann"s word, "a little social gathering." Then Eichmann went back to work with a will to organize the transports to Auschwitz and Treblinka. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Dr. Milton, I want to ask you a question which I am pretty sure you are not going to be able to answer. Except, I suppose, for the Weimar years, there really was no history of demo- cratic institutions in Germany? Ms. MILTON. There were certainly democratic parties, parliamen- tary elections. If by democracy you mean a form of government like the United States, no, not in Weimar. And Weimar was badly flawed. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Those democratic institutions had not matured to the extent they had in the United States at that point. That seems to me part of the explanation for what happened, that Ger- many had an authoritarian history, and that these things might happen more easily in an authoritarian society than in a non-au- thoritarian society. But aside from that, can you account for what happened in what many people regarded as the most cultured and most educated soci- ety in Europe, if not in the world? Ms. MILTON. I think it was a society that also lost control in the sense of experts, foreign office, everyone trying to do the best job possible under the orders given. Unemployment, of course, in part, fed Hitler's ability to take power in 1932, legally, by appointment. It was a society where, once starting a very perilous route, simply continued. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Is there some period on that route where a tran- sition occurred? Ms. MILTON. The transition to mass murder occurs with war. There is no proof, from the historical record, that murder was in- tended except possibly in the case of the handicapped and the dis- abled, prior to 1939. Persecution, forced emigration, yes. Mr. KOSTMAYER. And was there an underground in Germany? Was there opposition? Or was Hitler's rule so strong, was opposi- tion simply not possible? Or did opposition exist? Ms. MILTON. Tt was a diffuse and somewhat unsuccessful opposi- tion, ranging from communists, socialists, trade unions, and churches. It never succeeded in either stopping or overturning Hitler. It indeed assisted a few individuals in saving their lives be- cause people were able to hide people inside Nazi Germany. But it was largely unsuccessful. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Any idea on how many people were actually hidden and saved in Germany, by Germans, presumably? Ms. MILTON. In Berlin, the figures vary between 2,000 and 3,000; in the rest of Germany, approximately 3,000 to 4,000 over all the cities and countryside. Mr. KOSTMAYER. How aware were the German people of what was happening? Ms. MILTON. Very limitedly. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Very limited. Ms. MILTON. In terms of hiding individuals. Mr. KOSTMAYER. No, no. I mean how aware were the German people of the Holocaust? Ms. MILTON. Oh. They were aware of certain aspects of it. If you lived in Dachau, you certainly knew about the concentration camp. Wherever you lived, you read something in the newspapers about arrests, a little bit about the sale of abandoned property from former Jewish residents. You watched your neighbors being deport- ed and moved, never to return, and put in a claim in the city hous- ing office for their apartment. That is very widespread complicity. Mr. KOSTMAYER. And what do you think accounted for the un- willingness, if indeed I am being accurate, of the United States to take a more forceful position of opposition to what was happening, especially to bomb the railroad tracks that led to the concentration camps? Ms. MILTON. First of all, the belief that it might affect the war effort in the West; No. 2, the- Mr. KOSTMAYER. I don't understand. How would it affect the war effort? Ms. MILTON. The debate about the bombing of the railroad tracks in Auschwitz actually occurs less than 2 months after the landings at Normandy. So that the American foothold on the continent was perceived, although it was not all that precarious at the time. No. 2, a mistaken belief that it wouldn't have made a difference. And, No. 3, a distaste for the individuals that they were supposed to os- tensibly be saving, because there was indeed antisemitism in the American Government, as we all know after the fact. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Let me ask you a question which may be more of a matter of opinion, I am not sure. Is there an analogy between what happened in Germany and what happened in Cambodia? Ms. MILTON. I am not sure. I think there is one main difference, though. The events that took place in Nazi Germany occurred before the entire world over 6 years before war began. In Cambo- dia, it happened much more quickly, so that by the time the news of the genocide reached the West, it was essentially in its final phases or virtually over. Nazi Germany, prior to the war, was in power for 6 years, and all the countries of the world saw and watched what happened. America did not enter the war until 1941. That makes 8 years. Mr. KOSTMAYFR. Some have suggested there is a more current analogy between the treatment by the U.S. Immigration Service of the Haitian refugees and what happened in Germany. Do you regard such an analogy as valid? Ms. MILTON. I think it has. It might be. But that would be, obvi- ously, my personal opinion. Mr. KOSTMAYER. I understand. I understand. Ms. Bloomfield, I want to ask you just two questions. Can you tell me where in the museum's permanent exhibition the story of the Wannsee Conference will be told and how? Ms. BLOOMFIELD. As you know, the exhibition traces all the events from 1933-45 and a little of the aftermath, so that the story of Wannsee, while important, is a rather small part of a very long and important exhibition. The story of Wannsee is told after the stories of the Einsatz group and the mobile killing units that went into the Soviet Union behind the German Army in 1941 and murdered millions of people; and then a short exhibition on the ghettos that were created all over Eastern European, hundreds of ghettos. And then there is the segment on Wannsee, told basically with some photographs. I brought you some rather inadequate Xeroxes. But this is a lovely picture of the mansion, the villa that the con- ference was held in, which today is now a museum, as you know. Some of the photographs are of some of the key players in the con- ference, the highest-ranking official, Reinhard Heydrich, head of the Reich security main office, some of the other officials, as well as a list of all the participants and their rank. After the segment on Wannsee, the exhibition then goes into the story of deportations and then, of course, selection and life as it was such as in the camps or gas chambers. Mr. KOSTMAYER. The gentleman from Guam? Mr. BLAz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The question I am going to ask has been asked a thousand times, but I would like to hear your answer. Over the last 41/2 decades, after all activities such as this, we say, "Never again. Never again. Never again." And yet it happened once, it happened twice. The question is could it happen again? Ms. MILTON. I am afraid it could. And it could happen any place. I don't think any country is, unfortunately, immune from it. Mr. BLAz. Mr. Rosenfeld, would you care to respond? Mr. ROSENFELD. We have, I believe, evidence since 1945 of other genocides. When one says can "it" happen again, "it" will not happen again in the same way or to the same people, necessarily. But genocide has certainly occurred since 1945. In Biafra, in Cam- bodia; our friends the Iraqis and indeed the Iranians and indeed Arkala, as the Turks have been performing deeds which might be considered genocide against the Kurdistanis, who happen to be in the wrong place as far as all of those other countries are con- cerned. And there are other such examples. I do not believe that what is happening to the Haitian refugees is in any way, shape, or form comparable. I regret, as an individual, that we have chosen to deport them, but it is not anywhere near the same kind of thing in degree, intensity, or intention. But, yes, it-if we understand by "it," genocide--can occur again, of course. And I don't see that there is any international mechanism or that there is any particular international will to prevent it. We and other countries choose the cases in which we wish to in- tervene. We don't intervene everywhere, and many would argue that we can't intervene everywhere. But, yes, genocide can occur. Mr. BLAZ. I thank the panel for its courage and candor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you very much. There is a vote pending on the floor of the House. The subcom- mittee will stand in recess for approximately 15 minutes.

[AFTER RECESS] Mr. KOSTMAYER. I am sorry for the delay. There is going to be a series of votes on the floor of the House. We are going to have to go back and forth. The Republicans are being rambunctious. I just want to ask you, Mr. Rosenfeld, since you covered the Eich- mann trial, how you felt it influenced American public opinion, es- pecially in regard to the Holocaust, if you think it did? Mr. ROSENFELD. Well, in retrospect, what happened at the Eich- mann trial was a major educational experience for two groups of people. the Israeli public, and the world public. Western Europe-

55-199 0 - 92 - 3 by world, I really mean Western Europe and the United States. There was a tremendous amount of coverage of the Eichmann trial day in and day out. The trial went on for 3 months, and there was coverage every day on the American networks and in major Ameri- can newspapers and, I would venture to say, in most of the provin- cial press as well. However, and I should add this, that at that time, in the early 1960's, the word Holocaust itself had not yet been used to summa- rize the tragedy of the European Jews, and indeed there was very little discussion of those events and of their impact. The world was in a big hurry at that time to rush on beyond the Second World War, to become prosperous, again and at the same time to fight the Cold War. In Israel they were trying to build a country, with masses of new immigrants. At any rate, what seems to have happened thereafter was that while the trial made a tremendous impact, I believe, in the United States and in Western Europe, that impact did not last. Interest in the Holocaust, knowledge of the Holocaust, writing about the Holo- caust dropped off again very precipitously after the trial and only revived in about 10 years later. Ten to 12, 15 years later, somehow or other this subject once again came to the fore. The word Holo- caust became understood by every 10-year-old as to mean these mass murders. Writing renewed, and there are now hundreds upon hundreds of books, memoirs and documentaries and histories and so forth, and the Holocaust Museum is a result of this as well. That development, that drop-off of interest after the Eichmann trial, did not happen in Israel. That interest that had been created by the trial in Israel among the Israeli people, not all of whom are Holocaust survivors, by any matter or means, that continued. I guess the lesson one learns is the lesson that these events must not be forgotten and this hearing, all kinds of activities of this kind, educational museums, the Holocaust Museum, et cetera, are important to keep this memory alive. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Ms. Bloomfield, I wanted to ask you something I asked Dr. Milton earlier, and that is about the American response to the Holocaust and how you handle that at the museum. Ms. BLOOMFIELD. As I mention in my remarks, we give a very candid portrayal of America's opportunities to respond, beginning in 1938 with the story of the Evian Conference, a conference called by FDR, where 32 of the free nations of the world got together in Evian, France, to discuss what they were going to do about the ref- ugee problem at that time. Thousands of Jews were clamoring to get out of Germany, and there were very rigid immigration quotas in this country, extraordinarily rigid by today's standards, as well as in other nations of the world. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss what to do about the problem. The result of that meeting was that only the Dominican Republic, a rather small country, agreed to loosen its immigration quotas. I think we consider this really a failure to respond on the part of our country. In 1939, as you discussed in your opening remarks, we turned away the SS St. Louis after it sailed for several days around the shores of Florida. I believe the United States even sent out the Coast Guard to make sure that not one of those 930 desperate Jews would jump ship. Those individuals, as you said, were sent back to -Europe. A great majority of them did end up in Auschwitz. And then, of course, the other big event of the story is, as Dr. Milton mentioned, the failure to bomb Auschwitz or the railroad lines to them. Issued by the War Department in 1944, a letter stat- ing, "It would be too great a diversion of our war effort and might lead to an even worse fate for the captive Jews." Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you. Thank you very much. I appreciate the testimony of all of the witnesses and am very grateful for your presence here today. Thank you very much. Now, panel III. Dr. Reinhard Wiemer, the second secretary at the Cultural Department of the German Embassy; Ms. Ruth Laib- son, executive director, the Interfaith Council on the Holocaust. Ms. Laibson, would you like to begin? PANEL CONSISTING OF RUTH LAIBSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INTERFAITH COUNCIL ON THE HOLOCAUST; AND REINHARD WIEMER, SECOND SECRETARY, CULTURAL DEPARTMENT, GERMAN EMBASSY Ms. TJAIL; ON. Mr. Chairman and Members of the subcommittee, my nanie is Ruth Laibson, and I am the executive director of the Interfaith C',uncil on the Holocaust, which is based in Philadel- phia, Pennsylvania. I am ver: nenored to have the opportunity to be here this afternoon representing the council. It is an interreli- gious band, interracial body of educators, theologians, and commu- nity leaders which, since its inception in 1975, has been presenting educational programs, teaching the lessons of the Holocaust and making those lessons relevant for contemporary society. I bring with me today indelibly etched memories of a visit I made this past summer to the Wannsee villa on Lake Wannsee, a suburb of Berlin. I was there accompanying a group of German and American university students on a month-long program designed by the Interfaith Council on the Holocaust, to study Holocaust his- tory and to relate that history to the students' lives. Permit me to share with you some of my personal memories of that visit and to explain why they are so vitally important to me. The Wannsee villa, many contrasting images cross my mind when I repeat that name. At first glance, a large and imposing mansion, now disintegrating from decay and disrepair, probably not very different from some of the grand old homes in the most handsome neighborhoods right here in the Washington area, houses that, for any number of reasons, are neglected and void, waiting for a new owner, perhaps, or for a reincarnation to a public space. But I knew of this awesome place in a startlingly different con- text, a context whose outcome irrevocably sealed the fate of Euro- pean Jewry and altered forever the way that humankind defines itself. As my students and I entered the villa last summer, we became aware that dramatic changes were occurring inside the house, changes that had obviously not been started on the outside as of yet. The building was being meticulously and authentically re- stored to the condition it was in when the state secretaries of the Nazi ministerial bureaucracy gathered there on January 20, 1942, over a tasty lunch and some fine wines and cognac, to simply ap- prove the draft of a document that had been in the planning stages for many months. And now, 50 years later, my students were wandering from room to empty room, trying to grapple with two starkly contrasting re- alities. The innocuousness and the beauty of this serene setting juxtaposed with the enormity and the horror of the event that had taken place there. One of the students, Swarthmore College senior Julie Rubin, ex- pressed her struggle with these two realities in a poem that she has recently written. I will quote just a brief excerpt from the poem: An afternoon at the Wannsee Villa. I have been told that they planned the "final solution" here one afternoon. It took less than 2 hours, and then they celebrated over a late lunch. I imagine that while these men make an art of killing in the dining room, the cook, a young woman, makes an art of sustaining life in the kitchen, creating the food which will nourish and nurture the bodies which will, in turn, starve and ex- terminate other bodies. She prepares the elaborate meal which will satiate the men, whose appetites grow with the planning of each detail. The cook boils the chicken, then uses the water for the soup stock and its liver for the rich pate. Nothing is wasted. Skin can be used for lampshades, and hair can be woven into burlap-like cloth. Ah, isn't efficiency beautiful, raised to the level of art? My students and I discovered yet another reality at Wannsee last August, a reality that is redeeming and uplifting in what it offers future generations. We learned that the villa was being prepared for a diametrically different purpose than its use on that fateful day in 1942. The building was now being renovated for a perma- nent exhibition about the specific history of the "final solution." And this exhibition, in fact, just opened on January 20. But for me and for my students, even more important was the transformation of the upper floor of the building into a challenging learning and resource center for educators and for groups of stu- dents, not only from Germany but from all over the world. They will go there in years to come for intensive study addressing the broader issues of the roots of racism, antisemitism, and discrimina- tion that were the foundations of the Nazi philosophy and that con- tinue in the 1990's to require ongoing analysis and vigilance from this generation. As an educator working with young people, I see compelling evi- dence of the need to address these issues not only in the context of the emerging countries of Eastern Europe but in our own demo- cratic society as well. And that is why I feel it is so critical that Americans of all ages be given the opportunity to confront their in- dividual and collective responsibilities for building a more compas- sionate society for themselves and for succeeding generations. Studying the lessons of the Holocaust is one way to do this. Our gathering here this afternoon is another way. In commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Wannsee Confer- ence and the promulgation of the "final solution," we are renewing our resolve that history need not repeat itself, in fact must not repeat itself. 65 The Interfaith Council on the Holocaust is pleased to be a part of a network of Holocaust resource centers, museums, and communi- ty-based projects across the Nation which works closely with the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum as it brings the lessons of the Holocaust to the American people. Thank you for the privilege of sharing in this learning experi- ence here today. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you, Ms. Laibson, very much. Mr. Wiemer. [Prepared statement of Ms. Laibson follows:] 66

TESTIMONY BY RUTH LAIBSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR INTERFAITH COUNCIL ON THE HOLOCAUST

My name is Ruth Laibson and I am the executive director of the Interfaith Council on the Holocaust, which is based in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. I am very honored to have the opportunity to be here this afternoon representing the council. It is an interreligious and interracial body of educators, theologians and community leaders which, since its inception in 1975, has been presenting educational programs that teach the lessons of the Holocaust and make those lessons relevant for contemporary society. I bring with me today indelibly etched memories of 3 virit I made this past summer to the Wannsee Villa on Lake Wannsee, a suburb of Berlin. I was there accompanying a group of German and American university students on a month-long program, designed by the Interfaith Council on the Holocijust to study Holocaust history and to relate that history to the students' lives. Permit me to share with you some of my memories of that visit, and to explain why they are so vitally important to me. The Wannsee Villa - many contrasting images cross my mind when I repeat that name. At first glance, a large and imposing mansion, now disintegrating from decay and disrepair, probably not very different from some of the grand old homes in the most handsome neighborhoods right here in the Iashington area, houses that, for any number of reasons, are neglected and void, waiting silently for a new owner, perhaps, or a reincarnation to a public space. But, I knew of this awesome place in a startlingly different context, a context whose outcome irrevocably sealed the fate of European Jewry and altered, forever, the way that humankind defines itself. As my students and I entered the villa last August, we became aware that dramatic changes were occuring inside the house, changes that had obviously not been started on the outside, as of yet. The building was being meticulously and authentically restored to the condition it was in when the state secretaries of the Nazi ministerial bureaucracy gathered there on January 20, 1942, over a tasty lunch and some fine wine and cognac, to simply approve the draft of a document that had been in the planning stages for many months. And now, fifty years later, my students were wandering from room to empty room, trying to grapple wiih two starkly contrasting realities: the innocuousness and the beauty of this serene setting juxtaposed with the enormity and the horror of the event that had taken place there. One of the students, Swarthmore College senior Julie Rubin, expressed her struggle with these two realities in a poem she has recently written. I quote just a brief excerpt: 67

AN AFXTRSOS AT THE WAJSEE VILLA I have been told that they planned the final solution' here one afternoon It took less than two hours and then they celebrated over a late lunch. I imagine that while these men make an art of killing in the dining room the cook, a young woman, makes an art of sustaining life in the kitchen, creating the food which will nourish and nurture the bodies which will in turn starve and exterminate other bodies. She prepares the elaborate meal which will satiate the men whose appeLites grow with the planning of each detail. The cook boils the chicken, then uses the water for the soup stock and its liver for the rich pate. Nothing is wasted Skin can be used for lampshades and hair can be woven into burlap-like cloth Ah, isn't efficiency beautiful, raised to the level of art. My students and I discovered yet another reality at Wannsee last August, a reality that is redeeming and uplifting in what it offers future generations. We learned that the villa was being prepared for a diametrically different purpose than its use on that fateful day in 1942. The building was now being renovated for a permanent exhibition about the specific history of the "Final Solution". This exhibition, in fact, opened on January 20th. But for me and my students, even more important was the transformation of the upper floor of the building into a challenging resource and learning center for educators and for groups of students, not only from Germany, but from all over the world. They will go there, in years to come, for intensive study, addressing the broader issues of tbn roots of racism, anti-Semitism and discrimination that were the foundations of the Nazi philosophy and continue, in the 1990's, ti require ongoing analysis and vigilance from this generation. As an educator working with young people, I see compelling evidence of the need to address these issues, not only in the context of the emerging countries of Eastern Europe, but in our own democratic society as well. &nd that is why I feel it is so critical that Americans, of all aes, be given the opportunity to confront their individual and collective responsibilities for building a more compassionate society, for themselves and for succeeding generations. Studying the lessons of the Holocaust is one way to do this. Our gathering here this afternoon is another way. In commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of the Wannsee Conference and the promulgation of the "Final Solution", we are renewing our resolve that history need not repeat itself, in fact, must not repeat itself. 68

The Interfaith Council on the Holocaust is pleased to be part of a network of Holocaust resource centers, museums and community-based projects across the nation which works closely with the United States Holocaust Menorial Museum as it brings the lessons of the Holocaust to the American people. Thank you for the privilege of sharing in this learning experience today. Mr. WIEMER. Mr. Chairman, distinguished Members of the com- mittee, thank you for the invitation to appear before you in this committee. January 20, 1942 reminds us Germans perhaps more than any other date of the darkest chapter in German history, the genocide of Europe's Jewish population, systematically planned and executed by the Nazi tyrant. The secret minutes of the Wann- see Conference record in bureaucratic, pitiless language the out- come of the meeting attended by senior SS leaders and ministerial officials about the "final solution" of the Jewish question, as it was called. The millions of innocent people who lost their lives and those few who survived the horror are a constant reminder that the in- alienable dignity of men must always be the yardstick for our ac- tions. In the Federal Republic of Germany in particular the past is a heavy burden and must never be forgotten. Let me point out to you four areas which, after the German people's experience with the National Socialist terror regime, played a prominent role in shap- ing a more stable, just, and humane order. First, the political structure and constitution of the Federal Re- public of Germany are the immediate results of this experience, of the experience of the Nazi regime. Precluding the possibilit-' of any future reemergence of totalitarian rule is one of the basic ideas that has inspired the constitution of the Federal Republic of Ger- many. Key elements of this constitutional order are the observance of human rights as well as the principle of federalism. In addition to that, every citizen has the right to file a complaint of unconstitu- tionality before the Federal Constitutional Court. The second area is the compensation for the victims of National Socialism. Konrad Adenauer, the first chancellor and foreign min- ister of the Federal Republic of Germany, was personally firmly convinced that compensation for National Socialist injustices was not only a political necessity but, first and foremost, a moral obli- gation. In addition to that, the Federal Government was fully aware of the fact that the new German democracy after 1945 that had emerged from the collapse of the Third Reich would be measured by the community of nations not least by the way it would deal with the victims of National Socialist injustice. The Luxembourg Agreement of 1952 provided the framework in which global and individual indemnification was settled. The third area in this context are Germ- -Isra'.!i and German- Jewish relations. In the wake of the Lu. embourg Agreement, German-Israeli relations intensified dramatically. In the 1960's and 1970's the Federal Republic of Germany became Israel's most im- portant European partner. In the context of German-Jewish rela- tions, one has to mention the mediating function of the German Protestant churches and similarly the Society for Jewish-Christian Cooperation, founded by Protestant and Catholic Christians, which played a major role in overcoming antisemitic prejudice and in in- creasing the awareness of the Holocaust. A fourth area is the teaching of the Holocaust. There is a broad consensus among German educators that the intensive discussion

55-199 0 - 92 - 4 of the Nazi terror regime is one of the most important responsibil- ities incumbent upon our schools, upon the German schools, today. In this regard, special emphasis is placed on teaching the Holo- caust. In addition to teaching the Holocaust in schools, numerous me- morials dedicated to the victims of National Socialism in the Feder- al Republic of Germany serve the purpose of educating the broader public. They include Jewish cemeteries as well as reconstructed synagogues, former concentration camps, and the mansion in Berlin in which Heydrich spelled out his program for the genocide of the Jews. Following the period of National Socialism, Germany has been undergoing profound changes. These changes are evident not only in the political structure of the German state and in the institu- tions of the state, but also in the consciousness and the mentality of wide sections of the German population. This does not imply that there are no problems. As most of you will know, violent acts by skinheads, sparked by hostility toward foreigners, and actions committed by neo-Nazis in recent riionths, have left some observers of the reunified Germany in bewilderment and raise the question whether history, the history about which we heard today so much, may repeat itself. The answer is a definite "no." All major social and political groups in Germany have condemned these actions. The perpetra- tors of these actions are brought to court and receive stiff sen- tences, and numerous initiatives calling for solidarity with the vic- tims testify to the fact that the perpetrators are a minority and largely politically isL 'ated. Yet, nevertheless, the democratic state must be on the alert and prepared to defend itself. For us Germans, the Nazi past and the Holocaust provide the background against which we have formulat- ed our constitution and built the political institutions of modern- day Germany. On this solid basis, the unified Germany will contin- ue to be a stable democracy in which civil rights and political rights and freedom prevail. Thank you very much. [Prepared statement of Mr. Wiemer follows:] 71

Reinhard Wiemer

LOOKING AHEAD WITHOUT FORGETTING THE PAST - A GERMAN PERSPECTIVE

I. Constitution and Political Structure of the Federal Republic of Germany

The political structure and constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany are the immediate results of the German people's expe- riences with the National Socialist terror regime that had plunged Germany and the world into World War II and the Holocaust.

Precluding the possibility of any future re-emergence of authori- tarian rule is one of the basic ideas that has inspired - and is widely reflected in - the constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany, or the Basic Law, as it is commonly referred to. In drafting the Basic Law, its authors were keenly aware of past Na- tional Socialist experience as much as of the oppressing realities of the Communist regimes then prevailing in Eastern Europe.

A key element of the new constitutional order is its opening cata- logue of basic rights.

These basic rights grant the individual citizen immediately enforceable, subjective legal protection against abuses by the state, the legislation, and - logically - all public authorities. Such rights may be invoked by all courts, not least the Federal Constitutional Court as the supreme court of Germany, with every citizen having the right to file a complaint of unconstitution- ality.

The Federal Constitutional Court has emphasized the observance of the hunan rights set forth in the Basic Law as well as of the pro- visions governing the sovereignty of the people the division of powers, the responsibility of the government, the independence of the courts, the multiparty system, equality of opportunity for po- litical parties and the right to constitutionally form and pursue political opposition as central principles of Germany's free and 72

-2-

democratic basic order, but denied equal protection to the adver- saries of this order.

Mindful of the detrimental effects produced by demagogic agitation as a means of power in the hands of the Nazi System, the Basic Law refrained from introducing any elements of direct democracy into the legislative system, such as popular referendum or plebiscite, and even rejected election of the Federal President by popular vote.

Another characteristic feature of Germany's constitutional order is the principle of federal states. The federative national struc- ture - deeply rooted in German history - not only serves the state's organizational requirements, but enhances the protection of freedom as well. Federalism affords citizens dual participation in the national process of establishing political goals and objec- tives. It provides for higher transparency of the 9tate's actions and affords protection against the concentration of power in one hand.

The Basic Law also defines criteria for the shaping of foreign re- lations. It elevates the promotion of foreign relations in accor- dance with the rules of international law and the joint implemen- tation of public responsibilities by international institutions to the rank of constitutionally mandated national goals. It stipula- tes that the general rules of international law take precedence over national law.

This constitution makes the German people embrace the perception of a political community that is diametrically opposed to that of a totalitarian state. It implies the unmistakable rejection of to- talitarianism of all shades, which, in essence, seeks to con- centrate the power of the state in the hand of one individual, one party or one clique and thus to dominate the state, the economy, culture and society in an effort to permeate all aspects of life with a political vision that it purports to be of universal vali- dity. 73

- 3-

More than in almost any other country, the Basic Law has become a central focus of Germany's entire legal system. For more than four decades now, it has proved its worth as the sound foundation of a stable constitutional order based on the principles of freedom and democracy.

In the wake of the restoration of German unity and as a result of the accession of the former GDR to the Federal Republic of Ger- many, this constitutional order has been extended to the five new federal states that emerged from the former German Democratic Re- public.

II. Compensation for the Victims of National Socialism

The desire of the founding fathers of the Federal Republic of Ger- many to prevent any further abuse of power at the hands of the state and to heed the lessons of the National Socialist past be- came manifest not orly in the political structure 3f the new West German state, but also found expression .n endtvors to compensate the victims of injustice committed by the Nazi reqie and to ac- quaint future generations, who would have no first-hand knowledge of the National Socialist state, with the atrocities perpetrated by it and to raise and educate them to honor the ideals of de- mocracy.

Konrad Adenauer, the first chancellor and foreign minister of the Federal Republic of Germany, was firmly convinced that corpensa- tion for National Socialist injustices were not only a political necessity, but, first and foremost, a moral obligation. He, like numerous other democratic politicians of the still young West Ger- man state, never claimed that there was any way to "make up for" the genocide, torture, deportation, or exile that had been inflic- ted upon European Jews by the Nazi regime. As representatives of the German people they felt, however, called upon to provide com- pensation for the financial loss suffered and to assist the survi- vors of the Holocaust in building a new future. The Federal -4-

Government was fully aware of the fact that the new German democracy that had emerged from the collapse of the!Third Reich would be measured by the community of nations not least by the way it would deal with the victims of National Socialist injustice.

The Luxembourg Agreement of 1952 marked the first major step on the long and arduous road of rapprochement between the German and the Jewish people. Signed on September 10, 1952, this agreement settles both global compensation for Israel and the Claims Confe- rence as the parent association of Jewish organizations represen- ting the interests of Jews living outside Israel, as well as indi- vidual restitution and compensation matters. The agreement re- quired the Federal Republic of Germany to pay DM 3 billion to Is- rael to compensate for costs incurred in the process of resettling 500,000 European refugees in Palestine and Israel. In addition, Germany pledged to pay DM 450 million as global compensation to the Claims Conference.

The Luxembourg Agreement presented a novelty under the term; of international law: in 1945, no legal norms existed specifically covering entitlement to compensation for persecution. There was no binding obligation on either the Laender or later the Federal Go- vernment to offer compensation. Under the rules of applicable in- ternational law, foreign countries could have filed claims for re- parations only, without this having placed the Federal Republic of Germany under obligation to offer payments to Israel or the Claims Conference. Within Germany, claims for compensation or restitution would have been dealt with on the basis of established law only, this severely narrowing down the number of individuals entitled to compensation. Therefore, whatever payments were made by ay of compensation for persecution by far exceeded what was required un- der conventional law.

The Bundestag unanimously passed the respective bill and resisted all threats and protests launched by the Nations of the Arab Lea- gue against this strengthening of Israel's economic and political position. As seen from a financial angle, implementation of the remaining parts of the Luxembourg Agreement entailed even more far-reaching consequences. In them, the Federal Repullic of Germany committed itself to extend individual compensation to victims of the Holo- caust in accordance with nationwide applicable standards.

By January 1, 1990 approximately DM 66 billion had been spent on individual compensation. Overall, financial compensation amounted to roughly DM 85 billion. It is expected that, once the last claims for compensation will be settled, the payments will have reached a total amount of DM 120 billion.

III. German-Israeli Relations and the German-Jewish Relationship

In the wake of the Luxembourg Agreement, German-Israeli relations intensified dramatically. Important pacemakers in this process were the German trade-unions and the democratic political parties in Germany which developed close ties to their Israeli counter- parts. Since 1961, Israel has been receiving German development aid which, together with the global and individual compensation payments effected, has proved vital in building up the country and strengthening its economic stability. In the 60s and 70s, the Fe- deral Republic of Germany became Israel's most important European partner. Next to the economic and political importa-ce both coun- tries attach to their bilateral cooperation, the large numbers of German visitors to Israel deserve special mention in this context, who either as tourists or participants in German-Israeli youth exchange programs are afforded an opportunity to see the Jewish state for themselves. Ever since the 70s, Germany has after the United States provided the second largest share of visitors to IF- rael.

In the context of German-Israeli relations, the mediating function of the German Protestant Churches should not go unmentioned. In acknowledgement of personal guilt and based on the common heritage of the Hebrew Bible, the Protestant churches in Germany set out at 76

-6-

a very early stage to enter into a dialogue with nations victimized by the Nazi terror regime. Aktion Suehnezeichen is but one of several initiatives committed to this cause. Similarly, the Societies for Christian-Jewish cooperation, founded by Protestant and Catholic Christians as early as 1948/49 have, ever since the establishment of the Federal Republic of Germany, played a major role in overcoming anti-semitic prejudice and in increasing awareness of the Holocaust.

Dialogue and exchange programs between the Jewish community of the United States and German counterparts have contributed to the de- velopment of a new relationship which can serve as possible basis for future cooperation.

The Jewish communities that, in spite of difficult financial and psychological conditions, once again sprang up in almost all Ger- man cities in the post-war period, rendered another significant contributing towards the German-Jewish dialogue. Despite all pro- phecies to the contrary, they will not only survive, but even in- crease in strength and thus revive the tradition of German-Jewish coexistence.

IV. The Holocaust as a Classroom Subject

Ever since the emergence of the Federal Republic of Germany, the German authorities in charge of cultural, educational and reli- gious affairs - in seeking to continue the endeavors initiated by the allied military governments - have considered it a matter of primary concern to provide the young German generation with detai- led and comprehensive information on the origins and consequences of the National Socialist rule. There is a broad consensus among the ministers and senators of culture, education and church af- fairs in the German Laender that the intensive discussion of the Nazi terror regime is one of the most important responsibilities incumbent upon our schools today. In this regard, special emphasis must be placed on teaching the Holocaust. 77

-7-

Starting in the early 60s, the Conference of the Ministers of Cul- ture and Education has - in a series of nationwide resolutions - emphasized the need for confronting this period of German history at school. Thereby, the Conference gave unambiguous proof of its unanimous position on a matter that is of vital importance to the credibility of the Federal Republic of Germany as a nation based on the principles of law, freedom and democracy.

In addition to educating students on the history of their own peo- ple, the resolutions adopted by the Conference of Ministers of Culture and Education on this issue as well as textbook conferen- ces and recommendations are aimed at heightening students' awareness of the abuse of power, arbitrary acts by the state and the violation of human rights. In this regard, the authorities in charge of culture and education in the German Laender are anxious to ensure that current standards of research and the topics enga- ging the public discussion are duly reflected in the textbooks. The 1985 German-Israeli textbook conference assured the German mi- nisters that their efforts, in all, had proved remarkably success- ful: "It is in the (German) textbooks that the history of modern Jewry is dealt with most exhaustively ... Quite clearly, the em- phasis is on ideological defamation and - to an even greater ex- tent - on the persecution and murder of Jews under the national Socialist regime. The hard lot the Jews suffered in those times is neither belittled nor suppressed. ... This is manifest not only in the scope of presentations and in a generally extremely broad do- cumentation of picture and text sources, but also in the very fact that ... persecution is no longer dealt with as part of Hitler's biography, but is placed in the wider context of social issues. The decisive question as to who bears all or part of the responsi- bility for the persecution of Jews takes on increased urgency as compared with former textbooks ...".

In his historic speech of May 8, 1985, Richard von Weizsacker, the President of the Federal Republic of Germany, emphasized the ne- cessity to keep the memory of the Holocaust alive: "In our coun- try, a new generation has grown up to assume political responsibi- - 8 -

lity. Our young people are not responsible for what happened over 40 years ago. But they are responsible for the historical conse- quences. We, the older generation, owe to young people not the fulfillment of dreams but honesty. We must help younger people to understand why it is vital to keep memories alive. We want to help them to accept historical truth soberly, not one-sided, without taking refuge in utopian doctrines but also without moral arro- gance."

In April 1990, the first freely elected People's Chamber in the GDR. in professing the "responsibility the Germans in the GDR have for their past and future", expressed its regret at the crimes committed against the Jews and the suffering inflicted upon them - a profession never made before by GDR officials.

Their accession to the Federal Republic of Germany rendered the free and democratic basic order binding upon the new Laender as well. The standards of values enshrined in the Basic Law find ex- pression in the Laenders' legislation and have a determining ef- fect on the reformation of their educational systems. To meet the pent-up demand in the five new Federal states for objective, ideo- logically untainted information on National Socialism, new tea- ching aids and curricula have been introduced. Even before unification, DM 30 million had been spent on new textbooks as early as April 1990.

V. Memorial Sites and Research Institutes

Numerous memorials dedicated to the victims of National Soc.als-s in the Federal Republic of Germany serve the purpose of educating the broad public. They include Jewish cemeteries as well as recon- structed synagogues and former concentration camps.

On the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the "Wannsee Confe- rence" in Berlin, the mansion in which Heydrich, in 1942, spelled out his program for the genocide of the Jews was opened to the ge- neral public as a central memorial site. Featuring an exhibition 79

- 9-

and a library, the "Wannsee Villa" will host tutorial classes as well as educational projects that are aimed at keeping alive the memory of the holocaust. A similar purpose will be served by the "Lehr- und Dokumentatiosstaette zur Geschichte des Voelkermordes" (educational and documentational facility on the history of geno- cide) that is currently under construction in the city of Frank- furt. It will join forces with the already existing Jewish Museum in engaging in public information activities.

Throughout the Federal Republic of Germany, numerous commemorative sites exist that impart information and knowledge and provide for exchanges between Holocaust survivors and the younger German gene- ration. This is done primarily at the sites of former concentra- tion camps, such as Bergen-Belsen, Buchenwald, Neuengamme, Sach- senhausen, Ravensbrueck etc. Among these, the memorial site of Dachau, where approximately one million visitors are attended to and informed annually, figures prominently. Here, the "Dachauer Hefte" (The "Dachau Review" is the title of the English-language edition) are being published. This internationally renowned maga- zine publicizes studies and documents on the history of National Socialist persecution.

No less important than the memorial sites are the institutions that undertake to conduct research work on the era of Naticril So- cialism and the genocide. In Munich, the "Institute of Cntem- porary History" was founded in 1947 by -those Federal States that formed part of the former American occupation zone. Today thts in- stitute of high international renown is commonly funded by the Fe- deral government and the Laender. The city of Hanburg has, f.,r de- cades, been home to the "Institute for the History of German Jews" as well as to the "Research Institute for the History of National Socialism". Also worth mentioning is the Leo Beck-Instituto (ew York, London, Jerusalem) which regularly receives substantial funds from the Federal Republic of Germany. In 1982, the "Center for Research in Antisemitism" was established at the Technical University Berlin. The Center, which is unique in Europe, not only engages in research work on the Holocaust, but also conducts stu- 80

- 10 -

dies dealing with the German Jewish relationship, the history of the German-Jewish exile, as well as topical and fundamental pro- blems of antisemitism. The "Judische Hochschule Heidelberg" is de- voted to studying the history and culture of German Jews, as are numerous other university institutions and study groups.

VI. Outlook

Following the period of National Socialism, Germany has been un- dergoing profound changes. These changes are evident not only in the political structure and the state institutions, but also in the consciousness and mentality of wide sections of the popula- tion. There is a broad consensus in the Federal Republic of Ger- many that the Basic Law and the fundamental rights it guarantees constitute the inviolable foundation of coexistence in society.

This does not imply that there are no prcble-s. There may always be individuals who will refuse to acknowledge the principles of human coexistence set forth in the Basic Law and who possibly will adopt an aggressive and prejudiced position, in particular, towards minorities. In this regard, Germany is presumably neither inferior nor superior to other comparable :our-ries. Violent acts by skinheads sparked by hostility towards fcrsigners and actions committed by Neonazis in recent months have 14f: observers of the reunified Germany in bewilderment and raised tne question whether history may repeat itself.

The answer is emphatically no. These incidents -nvolve violence by a small minority. All major social and pcL't:,7 groups - the Fe- deral Government, the democratic political c-7:es, the churches and the trade unions - have condemned theSe --:ons, as has the general public. Numerous initiatives callig :r solidarity with the victims testify to the fact that the perzs:rators are largely politically isolated.

Yet, the democratic state must be on the alert anci prepared to de- fend itself. Racist agitation has always been . punishable offense 81

- 11 - under the Federal German penal code. Hence, the Federal Ministry of the Interior regularly monitors and reports forms of political extremism so as to be able to effectively .,ounter those groups that preach hatred, intolerance, racism and violence and deprive them of their breeding ground.- Undoubtedly, this is a perpetual challenge. Therefore, what continues to be of vital importance is that the structure of the state, together with the basic political consensus of a large majority of the population will prove successful in stemming this potential. 0 For us Germans, the Nazi past provides the background against which we have formulated our constitution and built the political institutions of modern day Germany. On this solid basis the unified Germany will continue to be a stable democracy in which civil rights and freedom prevail. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you both very much. Mr. Wiemer, thank you for appearing here today. It was perhaps not an assignment which you chose or which is a very pleasant one, so we are grateful for your presence. And I want to ask a ques- tion which you may not be able to answer, and I say it in a certain context. And that is that this country has made mistakes; for ex- ample, during World War II, as you know, we interned Japanese- American citizens in internment camps, certainly a great mistake on our part. We have provided some modest compensation to the families. So, no one is pointing a finger here. But what I am asking is how you think contemporary Germans can deal with the German past? It must be a very difficult thing to be able to ac- knowledge it. How do you think it is being dealt with? Can it be dealt with, or can it only be denied? And if it's denied, is that a mistake? Mr. WIEMER. I think it can be dealt with, and I think one has to deal, one definitely has to deal with the past. And maybe for the younger generation, the second and third generation after the Hol- ocaust, it is easier to deal with the Holocaust than it was for the first generation. Every generation has its own ways of confronting the past. I think that on the whole the Germans as a whole, and especially the young German generation, is prepared in confronting the past, and one of the instruments for doing so is having memorials like the mansion where the Wannsee Conference took place, of having very intensive history and contemporary history lessons in school, of having the democratic parties, the political forces, the union, the churches, deal with this issue. I definitely think that it is possible. I think that on the whole this past has been confronted. Coming to terms with it is a difficult thing, I think. Also, the term confronting the past is much more appropriate. I think it is clear that, of course, the young German generation is not responsible for the Holocaust, but certainly the young German generation, my generation, is responsible for the way we confront the Holocaust and is responsible for dealing with the consequences of the Holocaust. Mr. KOSTMAYER. And how is it dealt with in the schools, how is it taught, especially the very sensitive and painful subject of dealing with the fact that students who are being taught had, perhaps, grandparents or relatives who participated in this? Mr. WIEMER. It is very difficult to generally describe how the Holocaust is being taught. It, of course, depends on the teacher, how he teaches the Holocaust. Then, as you certainly know, there is a big difference between the old Federal Republic and the former East Germany, where two different ways of coming to terms of con- fronting to past were officially taught up until unification. But West Germany has a conference of ministers for culture and education, and already at the begining of the 1960's this conference set out guidelines and curricula in which it was made incumbent on every school to deal with this part of German history. There has been quite a number of school book revisions because every 10, 15 years, of course, a new generation of school books enters the schools. I think that there is today no erman student, no German high school student, who has not leaf.,ed about what was going on be- tween 1933-45 in Germany and i1 Europe and who has not heard something about the Holocaust. I just want to quote the German-Israeli school book conference which took place in 1985 and analyzed the contents of the German school books, of the then-West German school books, which deal and treat the Holocaust. And on the whole, the German-Israeli school book conference came to the conclusion that the Holocaust was, of course, dealt with but also in a very appropriate way. It was not belittled. And on the whole, Berman school books reflected also the historic result and what the historians had found out about the origins and the scope of the Holocaust correctly. So I think that on the whole quite a good job has been done. Of -course, it is not easy for the young German generation-and it has been a lot harder for the young Germans in the 1950's and in the 1960's-to deal with the fact and to ask questions, "What did my grandparents do? What did my parents do? Did they do enough? Did they help? Did they resist the Nazis or didn't they?" But I think these are individual questions, and you would have to go into the very many family histories in order to answer. What the state and what the school system can do is not to solve this personal di- lemma but to provide the necessary information for young Ger- mans so that they themselves know what was going on and that they themselves are, to say, in a position to try to prevent a recur- rence of these events and that they are very sensitive for the abuse of state power and become very sensitive also for human rights. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Ms. Laibson, you have dealt, I think, with both American students and German students? Is that correct? Ms. LAMSON. That's correct. Mr. KOSTMAYER. And do you see differences in the way in which they react to the Holocaust? Ms. LABSON. Of course, the students with whom I am dealing are a special group of young people who have committed them- selves to working with this subject in a very intensive way. Mr. KOSTMAYER. These are including the German students? Ms. LAMSON. Yes. Particularly the Germans. Mr. KOSTMAYER. These are German Jews or not? Ms. LAIBSON. No, these are Germans, all German Christians, as a matter of fact. We would love to have German Jews in the pro- gram. We haven't been able to identify them as of yet. The Ameri- cans are Christian and Jewish, and from every background interre- ligious group and interracial group of students. The Germans, in 1991 particularly, were a remarkable group of students. They were equally divided between the former East Ger- many and the former West Germany, and these students have come to this program with a deeply professed commitment to deal- ing with their past which, as Dr. Wiemer has said, is a painful sub- ject for them. They do not have parents and grandparents, in many instances, to turn to who are going to be completely honest with them as what went on in their backgrounds during that period. And they are searching. Mr. KOSTMAYER. And are there incidents of confronting, I sup- pose that would be in this case that would be their grandparents? Ms. LAIBSON. Yes. Mr. KOSTMAYER. And. Ms. LAIBSON. They in many instances have come to the program with a great sense of loss and a great sense of missing parts of their personal histories that they have to put into some kind of completeness and some kind of wholeness. They then go back to their country from this experience with a much firmer and strong- er sense of themselves through the experience that they have had with us. They are helped through this by their American counter- parts, who are also dealing with that part of their history, for the Jewish students specifically, parts of their families that have been destroyed and their histories that are not complete. Mr. KOSTMAY. What is it that brings non-Jewish German young people te this program? Ms. LAIBSON. I think they have a very sincere commitment to dealing with their past. They want to understand it, to grow with it, and to build a better society for themselves and for future gen- erations of Germans. Mr. KOSTMAYER. And how do they deal with it differently from German adults? Ms. LAIBSON. They are coming with a freshness of youth and the need to move forward with this subject. They are not willing to hear the silence, to live with the silence that their parents and grandparents have lived with. They need to hear answers and they need to put into some kind of completeness their personal histories. Mr. KOSTMAYER. And I asked you, but I wasn't sure what you said, as to whether or not they have dealt with this difficult subject with their parents or grandparents? Ms. LAIBSON. Some have tried to and have found silence. Others have had more open experiences before they come to the program. I have heard from many of them after the program, and it has been a very difficult period to go back to their families, for the German students to go back to their families. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Regarding the German students, have most of them had difficulty dealing with it? I mean it's going to be a diffi- cult situation whether their families respond or don't respond, I suppose. Ms. LAIBSON. Yes. Mr. KOSTMAYER. But have their grandparents or parents re- sponded generally or not generally? Ms. LAIBSON. Generally they have. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Generally. And how have these young people re- acted, especially when hearing those things they would least like to hear? Ms. LAIBSON. It's very painful for them, in many instances. But it's very important to them, too. And they are using this as a moving forward step for them. They are confident that this will give them the strength to move forward. They are more complete individuals for it. Mr. KOSTMAYER. They are surely the exceptions among German young people, are they not? Ms. LAIBSON. I would say that they are. They come, for the most part, having never met their Jewish counterparts in Germany. There are so few Jews in Germany. They are dealing, when they come into our program with issues that reflect the weaknesses and the strengths of American society as well, we talk about racism and discrimination and antisemitism in this country as well. And it helps them understand how they can build a stronger and a more compassionate society for themselves and for future generations of young Germans when they go back. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Mr. Wiemer, do you agree that these young Ger- mans who participate in this program and who have this extraordi- nary curiosity about their parents and grandparents are the excep- tion, or have you found that this is a common experience among German people? And let me ask you, and let me say in advance that you should feel free not to answer if you choose not to, how you have dealt-with this as a German? Mr. WIEMER. Well, I think that most of the Germans. of the young Germans, are willing and eager to confront the past. Of course, there are always exceptions. There is a minority of young Germans who- Mr. KOSTMAYER. But you are saying that most are willing to? Mr. WIEMER. Yes, yes, yes. Mr. KOSTMAYER. But this is in disagreement with what Ms. Laib- son said, I gather. Is that right? Ms. LAIBSON. No. I am sorry, then, if I have given that impres- sion. Mr. KOSTMAYER. No, no. My mistake. Go ahead, Ms. Laibson. Ms. LAIBSON. I really can't say what most young Germans would or would not say to that because I have not had contacts with that many. The ones with whom we have had contact are an extraordi- nary group of young people. Mr. KOSTMAYER. I had the impression, and perhaps it's a mistak- en impression, that the young non-Jewish Germans you dealt with, you thought were the exception in terms of German youth in their willingness, even their eagerness, to deal with this. Ms. LAIBSON. I hope they are not the exception. I think that they are exceptional young people. I don't know whether they are repre- sentative. Mr. KOSTMAYER. But we agree that they are exceptional young people. The issue is whether they are the exception, not whether they are exceptional. Ms. LAIBSON. I don't know. I can't really say whether they repre- sent a large number of young people. I don't know. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Well, Mr. Wiemer feels that they are exception- al young people, but not the exception. Mr. WIEMER. Well,-of course, you have a whole variety of people. You have a small group of people who out of their own initiative try ta know more, and I would guess that those are the young people that Ms. Laibson is having in her program. Then you have a large number of people who are willing to learn and who are will- ing to confront the past in schools, in their churches, in political organizations, in their trade unions. I think these two groups defi- nitely are the majority of the young generation. Of course, you also have a small group of young Germans who, for whatever reasons, don't want to be confronted with the past, maybe because it's uncomfortable, maybe because they somehow have some guilt feelings that they don't want to be reminded of. I mean there is a variety of reasons. But nevertheless I think the overwhelming majority of the young German generation is willing to confront the past, is willing to learn about the Nazi terror regime and has been brought up in a political environment and is sensitive to these issues that we have been addressing today here in this committee hearing. You asked about my personal experiences and my personal con- frontation. I don't think that I am a very representative case. In my paper I mention that the churches have been doing, I think, P very good job in trying to confront the past and in trying to enter again into a dialog with Jews and with Israel. In the 1970's I was a member of a Protestant organization, the Aktion Suehzezeichen, which Ms. Laibson also knows. I lived in the 1970's for 11/2 years in Israel, and afterwards I studied at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. So I belong to that generation who was confronted with the past in school. I became interested, though, as I said, I am not, in this respect, representative. Mr. KOSTMAYER. These were academic studies you were pursuing in Jerusalem? Mr. WIEMER. Yes, yes. At the Hebrew University. But in differ- ent degrees and with different amounts of enthusiasm, I think that most of the young Germans are willing and able to confront these 12 years of terrible German history. Mr. KOSTMAYER. And that willingness to confront the past in- creases, I suppose, with each generation? Mr. WIEMER. It increases with each generation, but it is also, of course, dependent upon external influences. For example, in 1978 or 1979, I think it was, the American movie "Holocaust" was shown on German TV, and the showing of this movie triggered off a tremendous discussion in Germany and the result, I think, was that quite a number of people began to think more intensely about the issues this movie raised than before. Another very, very important event also in Germany, I think- maybe it was the first event that started the public discussion about the confrontation or possible ways of confronting the past- was the Eichmann trial in Jerusalem at the beginning of the 1960's. So you have had in the last couple of decades quite a number of external events and also internal developments in Germany, like the student movements at the end of the 1960's, that had a catalyt- ic function in triggering off this discussion and in bringing impor- tant steps forward. And as I said at the beginning, of course, the further you are away from the actual events the easier it is for you to confront them. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Do you think that modern-day Germany has missed the point in its willingness to prohibit political extremism under German law? Mr. WIEMER. This is a very, very difficult discussion. As you know, under German law, political parties which are against the Constitution can be prohibited, forbidden by the Supreme Court. Mr. KOSTMAYER. And that has in fact happened? Mr. WIEMER. This has happened. Mr. KOSTMAYER. There are political parties in Germany today that are prohibited under the law? Mr. WIEMER. Yes. I mean the Nazi Party is prohibited. You had, if I am not mistaken, two cases in West German history of parties being forbidden. The first case was the so-called Socialist Reich- sparty, which was a political group very close to the former Nazi Party. It was forbidden at the beginning of the 1950's. In 1956 the Communist Party was forbidden as being against the Constitution. These were, if I. remember correctly, the only two cases where it happened. In Germany, also the discussion we have had here, the pro and cons, was going on as to whether it is wise from a political point of view to forbid political parties which from their political weight and from their sheer numbers are quite insignificant. In order to prohibit a political party, one has to go to the Supreme Court and ask for the outlawing of this party. Mr. KOSTMAYER. But the Nazi Party is currently outlawed in Germany. Mr. WIEMER. The Nazi Party is outlawed. Mr. KOSTMAYER. And do you think, coming back to my original question-and you can tell my bias, I suppose-do you think Ger- many has missed the point, at least in part, as this country has in some ways, by outlawing the Nazi Party or any party? Mr. WIEMER. No. I think that the Nazi Party -and basically the extremist parties are outlawed or that you have the possibility of outlawing them if you think that they are becoming too dangerous, I think this is a very good provision, and it is certainly one of the outcomes of the experience of the Third Reich. In America, and probably also in other countries, the question might be answered differently because you have a different politi- cal and historic experience. But in Ger-many, having the provision of outlawing parties was certainly one of the consequences drawn out of the experience of the rise of the Nazi Party in the 1920's and 1930's. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Doesn't it strike you as odd that one of the con- sequences of Nazi rule in Germany would be the outlawing of polit- ical parties? Mr. WIEMER. No, because as the experience of Weimar has shown, the democratic state must be able to defend itself against political parties and groups the aim of which is to undermine and to abolish the democratic state and with it the democratic rights and the guarantee of human rights that go along with a democratic political order. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Mr. Gruenwald back there would disagree with you, I think. Ms. Laibson, do you have a point of -view on that? And then we will go to the next panel. Ms. LAMSON. I think I would disagree also. I think that to strengthen the fabric of democratic society, you have to permit all sorts of voices and then you find ways of educating the populace that these voices are harmful to that democratic process. But out- lawing them and putting them into the closet and eliminating them I think is an absolutely inappropriate way of getting rid of them. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you. Ms. LAIBSON. Education is the appropriate route, I feel. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Ms. Laibson, thank you for your testimony. Mr. Wiemer, thank you and the embassy for your testimony as well. We call our final panel. Dr. Richard Breitman, an historian at American University; Dr. Gerald Feldman, an historian at the Uni- versity of California at Berkeley; and Dr. Charles W. Sydnor, Jr., an historian at Central Virginia Educational Telecommunications Corporation. I didn't know that corporations had historians. You are the presi- dent of the company and an historian; is that right? Mr. SYDNOR. Yes, sir. Mr. KOSTMAYER. All right. Dr. Breitman, would you like to begin? PANEL CONSISTING OF RICHARD BREITMAN, HISTORIAN, AMERI- CAN UNIVERSITY; GERALD FELDMAN, HISTORIAN, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT BERKELEY; AND CHARLES W. SYDNOR, JR., HISTORIAN, CENTRAL VIRGINIA EDUCATIONAL TELECOM- MUNICATIONS CORPORATION Mr. BREITMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for inviting me. Be- cause you have heard such a wealth of personal testimony and his- torical testimony previously, I will keep my remarks as brief as possible and I would be glad to answer questions, as I am sure the others will, afterwards. The Holocaust remains the ultimate example of what can go wrong not only in the modern world but in a modern industrial state. It exemplifies human capacity to commit evil. It originated in the minds of individual men and specifically in the belief that heredity dictated all forms of human behavior, and the so-called "final solution" of the Jewish question was the direct outcome of this racial ideology. The Wannsee Conference, about which we have heard so much today, was not, as some have correctly emphasized, not the occa- sion on which there was a decision to commit mass murder against the Jewish people but it was a semiformal occasion when the SS unveiled its program to a select group of high state and Nazi Party officials whose agencies' cooperation was needed. In a sense, it put the bureaucratic elite in the picture and on record in support of genocide. We have already discussed today some of the inaction of the out- side world. Western democracies did very little to impede Nazi genocide during 1942 and for a considerable time thereafter, for various reasons, including skepticism about atrocity reports, but also because of their concern about winning the war and corre- sponding lack of concern about the fate of unpopular foreign na- tionals. And this example of Western inattention to massive viola- tions of human rights holds lessons for us today. Students sometimes ask me whether we can really learn any- thing from history. Apart from the fact that I am professionally committed to doing so, I always answer "yes" because it seems to me that it is not only possible, it's inevitable that we learn some- thing from history, the question is "what?" 89 History is a kind of common memory and language that we all use to collectively think. And there is only the question of whether we will use that memory and language properly and carefully study the past or whether we will use it improperly. And in this connection it is sobering to think that men like Hitler and Himm- ler were readers of history and in fact claimed to justify their ideol- ogy, in part, upon their reading of history. So, what this tells us, I think, is that we have to be particularly careful and rigorous in our efforts to study the past and particular- ly the past involving episodes of genocide. And I therefore would call upon this committee and the Congress as a whole to support the Holocaust Council and museum as well as the National Ar- chives in their efforts to make available the documentary record of the past. Thank you. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you very much. [Prepared statement of Mr. Breitman follows:] Richard Breitman Professor of History 127 Quincy St. American University Chevy Chase, MD 20815 Washington, D. C. 20016 301-657-2188 202-885-2403 FAX 202-885-6166 Summary of testimony, Feb. 5, 1992 The Holocaust remains as the ultimate example of what can go wrong in the modern world, of the human capacity for evil. The Holocaust originated in the minds of men, and specifically in the belief that heredity dictated all forms of human behavior. The most extreme consequence of this racism was a program the Nazis called the "Final Solution of the Jewish question," a euphemism for the physical elimination of the Jewish people--men, women, and children. The Wannsee Conference, held on January 20, 1942, was the occasion when the SS officially unveiled the Final Solution to a select group of high state and Nazi Party officials, whose agencies' cooperation was needed. It put the bureaucratic elite in the picture and on record in support of genocide. The Western democracies did little to impede Nazi genocide during 1942 (or afterwards) in part because of skepticism about atrocity reports leaking out of Nazi-occupied Europe, but also in part because of narrow concern about winning the war and corresponding lack of concern about the fate of unpopular foreign nationals. This example of inattention to massive violations of human rights also holds lessons for us today. There cQntinues to be e great need for broad, careful study of the Holocaust, all the more because there are those those who deny and deprecate basic historical facts. The existence of the United States Holocaust Memorial Council and Museum, as well as the activities of the United States National Archives, should contribute to broader general understanding of this most tragic episode in our history. Testimony before the House Interior and Insular Affairs Subcommittee on Enerqy and the Environment, February 5, 1992 regarding the historical significance of the Wannsee Conference by Richard Breitman, professor of history, American University The mass murder of some six million Jews, usually called the Holocaust, has placed an indelible stamp upon twentieth-century consciousness. Adolf Hitler's Third Reich exploited all the ingenious advantages of modern technology to transport Jews from most parts of Europe to various killing sites, including specially constructed extermination camps, where they were executed in gas chambers as quickly, smoothly, and quietly as possible. This combination of sophisticated technology and barbaric mass murder raises serious questions whether there has really been progress i history, and it is a stark commentary on the human capacity for evil. The fact that some of the murderers were well-educated citizens in a highly industrialized society only adds to the incomprehensibility of the events. The Holocaust is of the utmost importance for historians, philosophers, psychologists, for the modern world. The main reason for this unprecendented descent to barbarism is clear. Hitler and other Nazi leaders regarded Jews not as a religious group, but as a poisonous race with unique and innate qualities, especially a selfish desire to infiltrate and dominate other races and nations across the globe. Jews were not the only group perceived as a threat to German supremacy and racial purity: gypsies, Slavs, and certain arbitrarily designated "Asiatics" also became racial targets, as did handicapped Germans regarded as genetically defective. There was also persecution of designated political and social enemies: Social Democrats, Communists, Freemasons, and homosexuals, as well as religious organizations. The Nazis, however, regarded Jews as the most serious threat, the masterminds of a world-wide conspiracy. Heinrich Himmler, son of a pious Bavarian Catholic secondary school teacher, had gained control of most Nazi programs to cleanse Germany of what the Nazis considered dangerous and useless elements. Himmler's main organization, the elite, blackshirted guards known as the SS, had branched out into a range of political, military, administrative, economic, and even cultural activities, but central to the SS's mission was a network of SS concentration camps.

Existing concentration camps within Germany, however, were inadequate and unsuitable for a larger and more lethal operation sketched out and authorized by 1941: to eliminate the Jewish "race" from Europe. Never before had a modern state committed itself to the murder of an entire people--men, women, and children. Using a vague term apparently coined by Hitler himself, the SS leadership referred to its far-reaching plan as the "Final 92

Solution" of the Jewish question or problem, a phrase that partly concealed the nature of Nazi goals and practices. The attempt to conceal was carried through in other ways too; the Final Solution was implemented in obscure places and with methods minimizing the possibility of leaks of information within Germany itself and to the outside world. For Hitler and Himmler feared their methods might create revulsion and adverse political effects; they also persisted in believing, quite inaccurately, it turned out, that Jews had powerful influence over the Western democracies. Even within the upper ranks of the Nazi Party and German government agencies there were many officials not yet aware of the scope of the SS's policy toward the Jews, let alone of the means needed to achieve it. So Reinhard Heydrich, Himmler's right-hand man who ran the large police and espionage agency called the Reich Security Main Office (RSHA), sent out invitations to an unusual, high-level meeting about the Jewish question. The gathering of fifteen high SS, Nazi Party, and civil government officials was first scheduled for December 9, 1941, but after Pearl Harbor, Heydrich postponed it until January 20, 1942. Heydrich had it his disposal a large villa in a posh Berlin suburb overlooking a lake known as Grosser Wannsee. This comfortable dwelling was supposed to be equally suited to work and to social gatherings, so it was here that the fifteen men, eight of whom held university doctorates, gathered. It was an elite group, many with ranks equivalent to undersecretary in the American government. Heydricn chaired the meeting explained its purpose: coordination of the anti-Jewish activities of all the agencies. Citing authorization from Adolf Hitler and Hermann Gbring, Heydrich explained that Himmler's office was in charge of Nazi policy toward Jews everywhere; there were no geographical limits on his powers. Then he reviewed the succession of past Nazi measures against the Jews and listed the number of Jews believed to ke in each European country, from a mere 200 in Albania to more than five million in the Soviet Union, a grand total of more than eleven million. The statistics, Heydrich claimed, were low estimates, since in many countries they were based on religion, not on the broader Nazi racial standards for defining Jewishness. All eleven million plus were to be included in the Final Solution. In the course of the Final Solution, Heydrich declared, Jews would be shipped to the east for what he called "labor utilization." Separated by sex, those Jews capable of hard labor would be used to build roads in such a way that a large part would die, or, as Heydrich more delicately put it, would fall away through natural reduction.

Those who survived "labor utilization" would be the toughest elements, who, if freed, would become the nucleus for Jewish recovery. Heydrich claimed that history had demonstrated the 93

Jews' ability to rebound from persecution. So these Jews would have to be dealt with "appropriately." Europe would be combed of Jews from west to east, although the German and Czech Jews would go first. Jews would be evacuated to transit ghettos; later they would be transported "farther to the east." The German Foreign Office, Heydrich added, would have to join with the police to approach foreign governments to obtain their Jews. According to the official record of the meeting, a good deal of time was spent discussing the policy toward the part- Jews, those non-Jews descended partly from Jews (with at least as many non-Jewish grandparents as Jewish ones--otherwise they were considered Jews). Since Heydrich wanted to keep the meeting relatively short, he deferred this complicated problem, as well as the fate of Jews married to non-Jewish Germans, to subsequent meetings. No one at this conference objected to the fundamental policy of destroying the Jewish "race" throughout Europe. The meeting lasted an hour to ninety minutes, then broke up into small groups and private discussions about the work to be done. Heydrich told Gestapo chief Heinrich Mller and Jewish specialist Adolf Eichmann how pleased he was with the way the meeting had gone. He had anticipated some resistance to a centralized policy; he got virtually none. In writing the official summary of the meeting, Eichmann used suggestive but vague terms, avoiding language unsuitable for an official document. A basic precept in Nazi Germany known as Hitler's fundamental command was not to reveal more than was necessary, earlier than was necessary, to more people than was necessary. So it was dangerous to put too much on paper. And Heydrich revised the summary three or four times before he let it be copied and distributed. One of the deletions, Eichmann later confirmed in the course of his trial in Israel, was a discussion of the exact methods of killing Jews.

This meeting was not for discussing and deciding the basic issues of Jewish policy. The SS and the Nazi regime generally scorned such democratic methods. On major issues the decisions came from the highest levels, and then word came down (or spread out) to those who had to know. Nor did this conference mark the beginning of the Nazi practice of genocide. In the wake of the German invasion of the Soviet Union, the SS and police had already carried out massive killings among Jews, Communist officials, and groups considered dangerous Asiatic races (Gypsies, Mongols, Turkmen). The Wannsee Conference--so it has become known to history--was the place where, and the moment when, the Final Solution was revealed to a select group of non-SS officials who, with the agencies they represented, would now have to cooperate. It put the highest level of the bureaucracy in the picture and on record. Ten days after the Wannsee Conference, Hitler reaffirmed in a speech to the German public that a world war wouid result in the destruction of Jewry. On February 2, fifty years ago last Sunday, Hitler told Himmler and his other evening guests: "Today we must conduct the same struggle that (scientists] Pasteur and Koch had to fight. The cause of countless ills is a bacillus: the Jew ... We will become healthy if we eliminate the Jew." The Final !,lution represents the ultimate repercussion of the belief that all behavioral characteristics are hereditary--in the blood. ',f heredity is crucial, then the most efficient way to mold the future of a people is to ensure proper human breeding, favoring those considered well endowed and eliminating those considered defective or dangerous. This example still remains as a much-needed warning to us today, for racism remains a threat to our society and our world. From the perspective of 1992, it is also important and instructive to look at what the outside world did and did not do in the face of Nazi genocide. Until the second half of 1942 the outside world knew little about the gas chambers and extermination camps. There were no satellites to provide aerial photographs, no portable TV cameras yet in existence. Fragmentary reports and stories about Nazi mass killings of Jews and other groups did, however, leak out of Nazi-occupied Europe and into the western press. Unfortunately, all too many people compared reports of Nazi treatment of Jews to stories about German atrocities in occupied Belgium and northern France during World War I, claims which turned out after the war to have been exaggerated by Allied propagandists. So there was much skepticism about reports of Nazi mass killings. Another factor was that a great many Europeans were suffering under brutal Nazi occupation, and it was not always easy to see that the Nazis had different policies for different peoples. When Jews pressed outsiders to recognize the growing tragedy for their people, unsympathetic observers could perceive this as a request for special favors from the Allies. The stakes of the military conflict were so high that many Allied government officials and private citizens wanted to focus all efforts and attention on that task. They paid little attention to anything else, particularly if it might complicate winning the war as quickly as possible. An advisory committee to the United States office of War Information, consisting of high-level government representatives from various agencies, demonstrated some of these obstacles when it laid down guidelines, in September 1942, for the reporting of atrocities: ... It is generally agreed that atrocity material relating to atrocities perpetrated upon citizens of other countries may produce in the minds of our people morbid results rather than desirable results.... Under such a policy as this, barbarous actions and cruelties not serving to directly illuminate the nature of the enemy, but merely to excite horror and hatred of all members of the races guilty of such actions, would not be released. The American government was only interested in broadcasting atrocity reports if they helped to mobilize the public and the outside world to win the war. And foreign Jews were not among the most popular groups in the United States, or for that matter, in some other parts of the world. Nazi radio propaganda and other media outlets were charging daily that the Allies were only fighting this war on behalf of the Jews, a charge which was completely untrue, but which some Allied governments did-not want to seem to support. Finally and perhaps most importantly, there was the psychological barrier: what the Nazis were doing was not only illogical and unprecedented, but literally inconceivable to many. The greatest historian of the Final Solution, Raul Hilberg, was, .I am told, once asked to sum up its lessons briefly. He is said to have answered in three words: "Anything is possible." By keeping in mind what has happened in the past, we alert ourselves to the full capacity of human behavior, and we will be more alert to early danger signs in the future. Students sometimes ask whether it is possible to learn anything from history. It is not only possible, but inevitable. Given the paucity of our knowledge and the range of our choices, we invariably, sometimes instinctively, turn to the past. Either we look there for guidance in solving present problems, or we look to find past situations that will help others, who share the same history, understand the dilemmas we currently face. The past is a common memory and language with which we collectively think. To study the Holocaust warns us and alerts us of the extremes of human behavior even in an advanced, western society. In this sense, the Holocaust will always be relevant to us. Unfortunately, we can abuse the past and distort our memory. We can slant history to claim privileges for some groups and mistreatment for others, to find artificial heroes and villains. It is sobering to think that Hitler and Himmler both read history and used history to justify their racial ideology. Improper study of history can actually aggravate our problems. We must, therefore, vigilantly maintain the integrity of the study of history and the accuracy of our historical findings. We need to combat the ravings of extremists and fringe elements who seek to convince us that Nazi Germany never intentionally massacred millions of Jews and other groups, that Jews and Gypsies were never gassed at Auschwitz-Birkenau, that Hitler had nothing to do with any killings of Jews, and that in any case there is too much emphasis today on events that may or may rtot have occurred many years ago. We must seek out and preserve all sLrviving records and personal accounts of the Holocaust and mike them available to scholars, students, and future generations. The activities of the United States Holocaust Memorial Council and Museum are an essential element of this transcription of the past. The United States National Archives, the custodian of captured German 96 records, war crimes records, and American intelligence records some of which concern Nazi Germany, also has played and continues to play a prominent role in our learning about and from the Holocaust. I urge the Congress to support the Holocaust Council and Museum as well as the National Archives in this essential task. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Dr. Feldman. Mr. FELDMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the invitation to testify here. Unlike my distinguished colleagues on this panel, I am not a specialist in the history of National Socialism or the Holo- caust. My research is concentrated on the period of the First World War and the Weimar Republic, periods which paved the way for National Socialism but during which the events we are discussing here would have been imaginable only to the most lunatic ele- ments in German society. I cannot really add, therefore, to the expert testimony already given, particularly by Dr. Milton. What I would like to do instead is to bring to your attention my perspec- tive on the significance of the Wannsee Conference and t'.e Holo- caust as a university instructor. I have taught modern German history and modern European his- tory at the University of California at Berkeley since 1963. There has been no year in which I have not dealt with the Holocaust in lectures and in seminars, and this has almost invariably involved reading and discussing the text of the Wannsee Conference and the documents related to it. The task has not become easier with the years, but rather the reverse. Thanks to the research done by persons like my colleagues on this panel, our understanding of the Holocaust-that is, of the course of the events themselves, decisionmaking processes, perpe- trators, collaborators, and victims-has become increasingly de- tailed and sophisticated and it is difficult to deal appropriately with all the issues in one or two lectures or even in a semester. An even more perplexing problem, especially in the general Eu- ropean history course, is that the 20th century has provided a host of horrors, and the Holocaust is part of a history of religious, - ethnic, and political persecution and mass murder that include the slaughter of Armenians by the Turks in the First World War, the millions of persons killed and deported under Lenin and Stalin. This record also includes the extermination of the Gypsies by the Nazis and the slaughter of masses of Serbs by the Croat Ustazi, which serves to remind us that the Nazis and certain of their allies had no intention of stopping with the Jews. 01 -course, this record of persecution and extermination is not limited to Europe and Asia Minor, as more recent events in Cambo- dia show, and the scope and range of the record of modern inhu- manity is likely to increase vastly if and when the peoples of the former Soviet Union and eastern Bloc confront their past. Finally, communicating this history and the events of the Holo- caust has been made more complicated by changing student con- stituencies. When I began teaching, I was dealing with the children of the World War II generation. Today I am teaching the last cohort of the children of the Vietnam War generation. Although enrollments have remained fairly steady over the years, between 125 and 200 in the lecture courses, the composition of my classes has changed from predominantly white students, many of whom were of Jewish or German background, to the very ethnically mixed classes I have had in the past few years. Clearly, the passage of time has diluted the immediacy of the Holocaust while the grow- ing awareness of other great tragedies and increased exposure to the broad canvas of human injustice and suffering, often via televi- sion, necessarily influenced the historical perspective from which and the context in which students placed the Holocaust. This has its dangers, but it also offers opportunities. The danger is that all these events will become homogenized, that sensibilities will be dulled, that all slaughter, deportation, and mass deprivation will lose specificity. Victims will thus be denied appropriate recog- nition, perpetrators will rest in historical peace. Hitler will have been proven correct when, with reference to the misdeeds of his campaigns in the East, he rhetorically asked, "Who- remembers the Armenians today?" It is thus very important that the Holocaust not be treated as just another historical subject, as the special province of experts and mourners but rather as the property of humanity and its con- stant need to understand and deal with the experience of inhuman- ity. I find that most of my students over the years, whatever their backgrounds or interests, seem to grasp this very rapidly because they correctly see in the Wannsee Conference and the Holocaust the most extreme case of what racism, ethnic hatred, fanatical ide- ology, and the totalitarian state can produce. This is the only time in history where the extermination of an entire people was system- atically and bureaucratically organized by a modern industrialized society with roots in the Western tradition. As the Wannsee Conference shows, the crimes were not simply committed by thugs and they required the active participation of a large body of persons, most of them quite normal and many-of them very competent and educated. I believe this is why the Holo- caust has continued to engage my students over the years, and I think it is important that this concern continue to be encouraged as widely as possible. Thank you. [Prepared statement of Mr. Feldman, with attachment, follows:] ' I d* 0i O N I - I. .

99

Testimony by Gerald D. Feldman, Professor of History, University of California at Berkeley, and Fellow, Woodrow Wilson Center (199-1-1992)

Unlike my distinguished colleagues on this panel, I am not a specialist in the history of National Socialism or the Holocaust. My research has concentrated on the period of the First World War and the Weimar Republic, periods which paved the way for National Social;im but during which the events we are discussing here would have been imaginable only to the most lunatic elements in German society. I cannot really add, therefore, to the expert testimony already given. What I would like to do instead, is to bring to your attention my perspective on the significance of the Wannsee Conference and the Holocaust as a university 1!Ltr 't'r.

I have taught modern German history and modern European history at the University of California at Berkeley since 1963. There has been no year in which I have not dealt with the Holo- caust in lectures and in semInars, and this has almost invariably involved reading and discussing the text of the Wannsee Confer- ence and documents related to it. The task has not become easier with the years but rather the reverse. Thanks to the research done by persons like my colleagues on this panel, our understand- ing of the Holocaust, that is, of the course of the events them- selves, decision-making processes, perpetrators, collaborators, and victims has become increasingly detailed and sophisticated, and it is difficult to deal appropriately with all the issues in one or two lectures, or even a semester.

An even more perplexing problem, especially in the general European history course, is that the twentieth century has pro- vided a host of horrors, and the Holocaust is part of a history of religious, ethnic, and political persecution arid mass murder that include the slaughter of Armenians by the Turks izn the First World War, the millions of persons killed and deported under Lenin and Stalin. This record also includes extermination of the gypsies by the Nazis and the slaughter of masses of Serbs by the Croat Ustashe, which serves to remind us that the Nazis and cer- tain of their allies had no intention of stopping with the Jews. Of course, this record of persecution and extermination is not limited to Europe and Asia Minor, as more recent events in Cambodia show, and the scope and range of the record of modern inhumanity is likely to increase vastly if and when the peoples of the former Soviet Union and Eastern Block confront their past.

Finally, communicating this history and the events of the Holocaust has been made more complicated by changing student con- stituencies. When I began teaching, I was dealing with the children of the World War I generation. Today, 1 .m c.-:-nu.w 100

2 the last cohort of the children of the Vietnam War generation. Although enrollments have remained fairly steady over the years-- between 125 and 200 students in the lecture courses--the composi- tion of my classes has changed from predominantly white students, many of whom were of Jewish or German background, to the very ethnically mixed classes I have had in the past few years. Clearly, the passage of time has diluted the immediacy of the Holocaust, while the growing awareness of other great tragedies and increased exposure to the broad canvas of human injustice and suffering, often via television, necessarily influence the his- torical perspective from which and the context in which students place the Holocaust.

This has its dangers, but it also offers opportunities. The danger is that all these events will become homogenized, that sensibilities will be dulled, that all slaughter, deportation, and mass deprivation will lose specificity. Victims will thus be denied appropriate recognition; perpetrators will rest in their historical peace. Hitler will have been proven correct when, with reference to the misdeeds of his campaigns in the East, he rhetorically asked, 'who remembers the Armenians today?' It is thus very important that the Holocaust not be treated as just another historical subject, as the special province of experts and mourners, bit rather as the property of humanity in its constant need to understand and deal with the experience of inhumanity. I find that most of my students over the years, whatever their backgrounds or interests, seem to grasp this very rapidly because they correctly see in the Wannsee Conference and the Holocaust the most extreme case of what racism, ethnic hat- red, fanatical ideology, and the totalitarian state can produce. This is the only time in history where the extermination of an entire people was systematically and bureaucratically organized by a modern, industrial society with roots in the western tradi- tion. As the Wannsee Conference shows, the crimes were not simply committed by thugs, and they required the active partici- pation of a large body of persons, most of them quite normal and many of them very competent and educated. I believe this is why the Holocaust has continued to engage my students over the years, and I think it is important that this concern continue to be en- couraged as widely as possible. 101

SUMMARY OF TESTIMONYs

I have taught modern German and modern European history at the University of California since 1963. My testimony here is based on my observations and experiences in dealing with the Holocaust in lectures and seminars. That task is challenging, especially in the general European history course, partly because the 20th century has provided a host of horrors and the Holocaust is part of a history of religious, ethnic, and political persecution. In addition, communicating the story of the Holocaust has been made more complicated by changing student constituencies. The passage of time has diluted the immediacy of the Holocaust, while the growing awareness of other great tragedies necessarily influences the context in which students place the Holocaust. This has its dangers, but it also offers opportunities. The danger is all the tragedies of the 20th century will become homogenized, that victims will be denied appropriate recognition and that perpetrators will rest in their historic peace. It is thus very important that the Holocaust be treated not as just another historical subject, but rather as the property of humanity in its constant need to understand and deal with the experience of inhumanity.

I find that most of my students over 'ig ysars, whatever their backgrounds or interests, correctly sec in the Wannsee Conference and the Holocaust the most extreme case of what racism, ethnic hatred, fanatical ideology, and the totalitarian state can produce. It is important that concern with this unique event, the only time in history when the extermination of an entire people was systematically organized by an industrial society with roots in the western tradition, continue to be encouraged as widely as possible.

55-199 0 - 92 - 5 102

Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you very much. Mr.Sydnor. Mr. SYDNOR. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Members of the subcommittee, and thank you for the invitation to appear before you in this hearing. I am Charles Sydnor, the president and gener- al manager of Central Virginia Educational Telecommunications Corporation, formerly the president of Emory and Henry College in Virginia, and before that, executive-assistant to Governor Charles S. Robb of Virginia. I am also a professional historian and a spe- cialist in the history of Nazi Germany and the history of the SS. The specific purpose of this subcommittee hearing in commemo- rating the 50th anniversary of the Wannsee Conference relates di- rectly to my most important undertaking as an historian. The eventual publication of a biography of Reinhard Heydrich, the con- venor of the Wannsee Conference and the administrator of the "final solution" to the Jewish question until his assassination in Prague in June 1942. Far more important, Mr. Chairman, are the larger purposes I be- lieve these proceedings may address in helping us to reflect upon the terrible and unfinished legacy of that meeting. The murderous preparations and activities that preceded the Wannsee Conference and the systematic extermination of millions of European Jews that began in its aftermath inflicted on civilization a phenomenon unique in human history. What came before Wannsee was orga- nized, widespread slaughter. What followed was assembly line, in- dustrialized genocide. Our most important objective must be to assure that the experi- ence of both the perpetrators and the victims remains unique. As a symbolic occurrence, the significance of the Wannsee Con- ference persists in history and in our own contemporary experience as Americans. It entered our national consciousness as we liberated the German concentration camps, was laid before us in the massive evidence used in the Nuremberg and other postwar trials; and in the half century since, the agenda of the Wannsee Conference, which we know as the Holocaust, has become an important subject for American historians and a vital curricular addition in a grow- ing number of the Nation's colleges and schools. Most immediately, it has come home to touch all who would learn and are of con- science through the experiences of the survivors who came to our land. And there is something else, Mr. Chairman. Our sense of moral obligation and common decency has made accountability for those who served that agenda an item of unfinished business. The signifi- cance of Wannsee reaches beyond this room, beyond the mall and this city, through our system of justice and into courtrooms scat- tered across the country, for it is a fact, a sad and disagreeable fact, that Wannsee and the Holocaust placed among us both perpe- trators and participants as well as the victims and survivors of the Holocaust. As an historian, I have had experience in these matters. Since 1981 1 have served the Office of Special Investigations in the crimi- nal division of the U.S. Department of Justice as an expert witness in denaturalization and deportation proceedings undertaken against former SS men-all concentration camp guards-who man- 103 aged to enter the United States illegally in the decade after the Second World War. Since 1982 I have testified for the Government in seven civil suits brought by OSI against men who were members of the SS or were SS auxiliaries in Nazi concentration camps, and have served as an affiant in three additional cases, in two of which the courts entered summary judgment on behalf of the Government. As a result of two of those cases, Mr. Chairman, the-defendants, Bruno Karl Blach and John Demjanjuk, have been extradited as war criminals to stand trial for mass murder before courts in Germany and in Israel, respectively. The concentration camps in question in these cases, where the defendants had served as guards, included Dachau, Sachsenberg, Mauthausen, two sub-camps of Mauthausen, Gross-Rosen, Sachsen- hausen, and the extermination camps at Auschwitz, Birkenau, So- bibor, and Treblinka. In each case and in every instance, the camps in question and the role of the defendants and their SS guard units related directly or indirectly to the agenda of the Wannsee Confer- ence. The training and indoctrination of SS personnel in brutaliz- ing prisoners in the prewar German concentration camps was in- dispensable to the enterprise of organized mass murder carried out in the wartime extermination camps in Nazi-occupied Eastern Europe. My experience in these matters involves but a fraction of the cases OSI has filed over the last decade. In bringing to bear the remedies available in American law to punish those who partici- pated or assisted in the persecution and murder of the European Jews. Beyond the accumulation of precedent these cases are estab- lishing in American law, the documentary record OSI has amassed in original records and eye-witness testimony gathered from all over the world is now immense. These materials will one day serve the purposes of historical -research in the Holocaust as vitally as OSI's work now strengthens the cause of justice, fragmentary and incomplete as it may, as it has been left to us to pursue. Convening this hearing to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Wannsee Conference is, in my view, both commendable and timely-and timely in two respects. First, this congressional activi- ty may help to focus public attention upon a terrible milestone that we simply must remember; and, second, these proceedings today, hopefully, will encourage and, in turn, be encouraged by the ongo- ing and unfinished work in the Department of Justice made neces- sary by the policies of persecution and genocide among those who developed and those who served the agenda of the Wannsee Confer- ence. In this endeavor and within the Federal Government, Mr. Chair- man, you and the members of this subcommittee are not alone. Thank you very much. [Prepared statement of Mr. Sydnor follows:] 104

Statement of Dr. Charles W. Sydnor, Jr.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and members of the Subcommittee, and-thank you for the Invitation to appear before you In this hearing. I am Dr. Charles W. Sydnor, the President and General Manager of Central Virginia Educational Telecommunications Corporation, formerly the President of Emory. and Henry College In Virginia, and before that, Executive Assistant to theil Governor Charles S. Robb. I am also a professional historian, trained at Varlderbilt University and the University of Freiburg, Germany, and a specialist In the history of Nazi Germany and the SS. Additional biographical and professional material Is attached for your information.

The specific purpose of this Subcommittee hearing, in commemorating the S0th anniversary of the Wannsee Conference, relates directly to my most Important undertaking as an historian - the eventual publication of a biography of Reinhard Heydrlch, the Convenor of the Wannsee Conference, and the administrator of the Final Solution to the Jewish Question until his assassination in Prague in June, 194Z2.

Far more important, Mr. Chairman, are the larger purposes I believe these proceedings may address In helping us to reflect upon the terrible and unfinished legacy of that meeting. The murderous preparations and activities that preceded the Wannsee Conference, and the systematic extermination of millions of European Jews that began in its aftermath, -inflicted upon civilization a phenomenon unique In human history: what came before Wannsee was organized, widespread slaughter; what followed was assembly-line, industrialized genocide. Our most Important objective must be to Insure that the experience of both the perpetrators and the victims remains unique.

As a symbolic occurrence, the significance of the Wannsee Conference persists In history, and in our own contemporary experience as Americans. It entered our national consciousness as we liberated the German concentration camps; was laid before us in the massive evidence used in the Nuremberg and other post war trials; and in the half-century since, the agenda of the Wannsee Conference, which we know as the Holocaust, has become an important subject for American historians, and a vital curricular addition in a growing number of the nation's colleges and schools. Most immediately, It has come home to touch all who would learn, and are of conscience, in the experiences of their survivors who came to our land. And there is something else, Mr. Chairman.

Our sense of moral obligation and common decency has made accountability for those who served that agenda an Item of unfinished business. The significance of Wannsee reaches beyond this room, beyond the Mall and this city, through our system of Justice, and Into courtrooms scattered across the country. For It is a fact, a sad and disagreeable fact, that Wannsee and the Holocaust placed among us both perpetrators and participants as well as the' victims and survivors of the Holocaust. As an historian, I have had experience In these matters.

Since 1981, I have served the Office of Special Investigations in the Criminal Division of the United States Department of Justice as an expert 105

-2-

witness In denaturalization and deportation proceedings undertaken against former SS men - all concentration camp guards -- who managed to enter the United States Illegally in the decade after the Second World War. Since 1982, I have testified for the government In seven civil suits brought by OSI against men who were members of the SS, or were SS auxiliaries In Nazi concentration camps, and have served as an afflant in three additional cases -- In two of which the courts entered summary Judgement on behalf of the government as plaintiff. As a result of two of those cases, Mr. Chairman, the defendants, Bruno Karl Blach and John Demjanjuk, have been extradited as war criminals to stand trial for mass murder before courts in Germa~y and In Israel respectively. The concentration camps In question in these cases where defendants had served as guards included Dachau, Sachsenberg, Mauthausen, two sub-camps of Mauthausen, Gross-Rosen, Sachsenhausen, and the extermination camps at Auschwitz-Birkenau, Sobibor and Treblinka. In each case, and In every Instance, the camps In question, and the role of the defendants In their SS guard units, related directly or indirectly to the agenda of the Wannsee Conference. The training and indoctrination of SS personnel in brutalizing prisoners in the prewar German concentration camps was Indispensable to the enterprise of organized mass murder carried out in the wartime extermination camps In Nazi-occupled eastern Europe. My experience In these matters Involves but a fraction of the cases OSI has filed over the last decade in bringing to bear the remedies available In American law to punish those who participated or assisted in the persecution and murder of the European Jews.

Beyond the accumulation of precedent these cases are establishing in Amrlcan law, the documentary record OSI has amassed In original records and eyewitness testimony gathered from all over the world is Immense. These materials will one day serve the purposes of historical research in the Holocaust as vitally as OSi's work now strenghtens the cause of justice - fragmentary and Incomplete as It may be as it is left to us. Convening this hearing to commemorate the SOth anniversary of the Wannsee Conference is, in my view, both commendable and timely -and timely in two respects. First, this Congressional activity may help to focus public 'attention upon a terrible milestone that we simply must remember. And second, these proceedings today, hopefully, will encourage, and In turn be encouraged by, the on-going and unfinished work in the Department of Justice, made necessary by the policies of persecution and genocide among those who developed and those who served the agenda of the Wannsee Conference.

In this endeavor and within the federal government, Mr. Chairman, you and the members of this Subcommittee are not alone. Thank you for your time and attention. 106

Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you very much. Dr. Breitman, let me ask you as an historian whether or not you believe every historical event has a rational explanation? Mr. BREITMAN. Every historical event has an explanation; that is to say, it is caused by other events. And if you wish to regard this whole process as rational-that is, determining which causes lead to which effects-in that sense, yes, every historical event has a ra- tional explanation. That is not to say that individuals all behave in a rational manner; that is, in their best interests or in the general interest. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Well, give us the rational explanation for the Holocaust. Mr. BREITMAN. You mean why did the Nazis think that they had to- Mr. KOSTMAYER. No. I mean why did the most cultured and edu- cated society in Europe, perhaps, as I said earlier in the day, in the world allow itself to participate in this kind of brutality? Mr. BREITMAN. Well, I could answer that question in either 10 seconds or in perhaps 10 weeks, and I will choose the 10-second answer. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you. Mr. BREITMAN. It is because the German Government was taken over by a political movement led by people who believed that Jews were their mortal enemy. Mr. KOSTMAYER. And how did they manage to convince the whole country of that, including people who, I gather, had not previously believed it? Mr. BREITMAN. They didn't have to convince the whole country; they simply had to gain enough power so that they could work their will with the support of active minorities rather than the entire population. Mr. KOSTMAYER. So you are saying that it was a limited number of people who were actually participants in carrying out these acts. Mr. BREITMAN. It was a minority of the population, in that sense, a limited number of people. The more general question you are raising I think you have raised with others, and we might as well get back to it here, is how much did the German people as a whole know and to what degree was there opposition to the "final solu- tion." And there is certainly now a good deal of evidence that a fairly broad spectrum of the German public knew something about persecution and killings of Jews, though not necessarily all the de- tails about the extermination camps. Mr. KOSTMAYER. When did the first exterminations, if you will, take place? Mr. BREITMAN. At the end of-well, if you are talking about in an extermination camp-the end of December 1941. There were, of course, massive killings before that date, especially in the wake of the German invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941. But there had been killings of thousands of Jews as well as Poles in the fall of 1939. So, you know, the killings went back. Mr. KOSTMAYER. By firing squad? Mr. BREITMAN. In some cases, yes. Mr. KOSTMAYER. By means other than extermination camps or other than gas? 107

Mr. BREITMAN. Yes. Mr. KOSTMAYER. And what was the extent of the knowledge of this after December 1941 in the United States among the American people? Mr. BREITMAN. Well, that is a good question, too. 1 guess I am going to have to answer that by saying that there was a lot of in- ormation available from the fall of 1942 onward. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Was this dealt with in the American press? Mr. BREITMAN. Yes. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Fully? Mr. BREITMAN. It depends what you mean by "fully." It was often buried in the back pages of major newspapers and dealt within great detail only by the Jewish press or the occasional ex- ception, P.M. in New York, for example, rather than the New York Times. But let me flesh that out. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Maybe you can just explain that. You mean there were legitimate papers in the United States that didn't deal with it as much as others did? Mr. BREITMAN. There were a lot of papers, the major papers in the United States, that didn't deal with it a great deal, though they did deal with it occasionally and to a limited extent. Let me flesh out one implied distinction I made a moment ago. I said there was a lot of information around. One of my colleagues and former coauthor wrote a book called "The Terrible Secret,' in which the author, Walter Ligour, traced a tremendous amount of information that was leaking out within Europe and to the West- ern hemisphere about Nazi killings of Jews and other forms of Nazi persecution, and his finding was that most places, most of the time, people tended not to fully accept that information, which is it was partly a question of paying attention to other things and it was partly a question of perhaps psychologically not wanting to believe the information in the reports that were coming out and so that they didn't fully comprehend. Mr. KOSTMAYER. And partly, I suppose, of people -really not knowing what it was that they could do? Mr. BREITMAN. It was partly not knowing and not knowing if they could rely on these reports and having a past history of skep- ticism about government propaganda and atrocity reports, and in some cases, disinclination to want to do anything about the reports even if they were true because these were foreigners who were being persecuted and we had more important things to worry about. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Dr. Feldman, do you want to respond to this line of questioning? Mr. FELDMAN. Well, I think that the problem in Germany and the problem outside is also, of course, a certain amount of not wanting to know. That is, as long as the information is relatively casual, it's not exactly hard, you don't know exactly what you are dealing with, then it's fairly easy to dismiss it or to put it on some kind of back page and not to confront it. And there is a natural human disinclination to confront this kind of material. If I might go back to an earlier question of yours, I really think that, in trying to understand why this kind of thing or how this 108 kind of thing can happen in Germany, I do think that here the traumatic experience of the First World War and the defeat, the lack of real commitment to democratic and parliamentary institu- tions, and the inclination to look for a scapegoat does lead to, I think, a much more broadly based antisemitism than has some- times been suggested. That is, there was a general inclination in German society to think that Jews were too prominent in the professions, in the press, in medicine, all of these, by the way, very troubled profes- sions in the Weimar Republic, and to have a feeling that it would really be a rather good thing if there were fewer Jews, perhaps no Jews at all, in these particular activities. So that when Hitler begins with the persecution of the Jews, there is a certain amount of broad sentiment for sort of putting Jews in their place, which is not to say that is a sentiment for exterminating them. But I think that the process by which this takes place is very important, and I think it is important to understand that there was a broad support, in many circles, especially educated circles, for a different kind of treatment of the Jews. Mr. FELDMAN. And perhaps equally important, there was a lack of concerted opposition to Nazi antisemitism. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Is that because the regime was so repressive that opposition was not a realistic possibility? Mr. BREITMAN. No. We have at least isolated examples of popular resistance to certain Nazi policies, so I am inclined to think with Professor Feldman that antisemitism had some support among the German public. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Dr. Sydnor, do you want to respond to this? Mr. SYDNOR. Yes. I would agree with what Dr. Feldman has just said. And I would also, I think, have to make the observation that Jews were not really a priority with the War Department and with the Roosevelt administration in 1942, 1943, 1944, and that Ausch- witz was in fact bombed. At the time that John J. McCloy was saying that this could not be done, the 8th Air Force, I believe, had been conducting photo reconnaissance missions for some time over that part of Silesia. There were photo interpretations done of the industrial complex around Auschwitz III, the Monovitz camp, and t. ire were bombing raids conducted in August 1944, 1 believe, both the-British and American Air Forces. So, we were bombing, we were bombing targets at Auschwitz, but it was the I.G.-Farben synthetic rubber plant and other industrial installations. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Dr. Breitman, you have written somewhat about American immigration law during this period, and I made a refer- ence earlier on to the, I guess, the Wagner-Rogers bill. Mr. BREITMAN. Yes. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Which I believe, and you will correct me if I am mistaken, was to allow 10,000 Jewish refugee children into this country in 1939 and 1940. Is that right? Mr. BREITMAN. That's correct. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Can you tell us about this? Was this not a popu- lar thing to vote for that year? 109

Mr. BREITMAN. Generally speaking, it was not a popular thing to vote for in that year. Generally speaking, the feeling within the ad- ministration, and even in some liberal circles outside of the admin- istration, was that if Congress had been asked to do something about the immigration laws, Congress would have cut the quotas rather than increased the quotas. A bill to let in children, Jewish children, had a better chance than a bill to increase the quotas generally. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Well, is it correct historically to say that this bill was not in fact voted out of the committee; is that right? Mr. BREITMAN. That's correct. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Because the votes were not there for it? It was an unpopular measure, is that it? Mr. BREITMAN. The earlier soundings that were made on the bill indicated that it was likely to lose in one and perhaps both houses. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Now, do you regard this-and this is a judgment on your part-as analogous to the situation with the Haitian refu- gees in thi3 country today, given that the extermination by gas had not started until December of 1941 and this was, I think, in 1939? Mr. BREITMAN. Yes. If you are asking me whether the Haitian Government today is comparable to the Nazi regime, I would have to answer probably not. I certainly hope not. If you are asking me whether we are now standing by and watch- ing a government commit major violations of human rights and not granting asylum to people who are trying to flee that government and is that a parallel to 1939, 1 would have to answer "yes." Mr. KOSTMAYER. Dr. Feldman, let me ask you. We have heard testimony today both from a Holocaust survivor and from someone from the German Embassy, Mr. Wiemer from the German Embas- sy, which I gather both agree that a democratic society has the right to impose some restrictions on extremist political parties- and when I say extremist political parties, I don't mean parties which are engaging in violence or breaking the law, I mean parties which have an extreme ideology--can you tell us what history says about the success of efforts to do that and what these efforts are likely to lead to in modern-day Germany, where such practices are now being undertaken by the German Government? Mr. FELDMAN. Well, my tendency would be to emphasize the im- portance of commitment to democratic institutions in the society at large rather than to what you can accomplish by banning political parties or groups. Clearly, groups that engage in violence should be banned. I think that is one of the lessons. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Well, violence is against the law. Mr. FELDMAN. But when you are talking about parties that advo- cate things that we don't particularly like, I am inclined to think that in fact it's much better that some of them be out in the open and that you know who they are and that you have some means to measure their support and that you do something about the condi- tions that might lead to their popularity rather than to try to sup- press them by law. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Could suppressing them have the opposite effect? Mr. FELDMAN. Well, only if there is a basis in the society, a real basis for their popularity on some kind of large-scale level. Obvi- 110 ously, if they are sort of minor crazy groups, it really doesn't matter-I mean it wouldn't matter terribly much, but I think we would be better off not suppressing them, letting them express themselves. My major emphasis again would be on the importance of demo- cratic institutions. I think the difference between Germany today and Germany then is the difference in the commitment to certain kinds of institutions and a basic change in the attitude of that soci- ety toward democracy. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Although not a total change. Although not a total change, since the current German Government has outlawed political parties which hold offensive views. Mr. FELDMAN. Well, in fact, there has been a Communist party in West Germany all these years, with another name. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Right. Mr. FELDMAN. It obviously has not done terribly well. And there have been various right-wing groups, this Republican Party most recently, which has not been banned. Mr. KOSTMAYER. The one in Germany. Mr. FELDMAN. Yes. And I don't-well, there is one in West Ger- many before the unification that was doing rather well in certain circles. But I would not count on these kinds of measures, and I think that basically what has changed Mr. KOSTMAYER. You would not count on them to work effective- ly. Mr. FELDMAN. Right. And I think the basic difference in Germa- ny today is the difference in the attitude toward the political system and a kind of general consensus about parliamentary de- mocracy, whatever the problems of that society. One doesn't have to like all the things that go on all there, all the things that are said by the chancellor or anything else. Nonetheless, fundamental- ly, there has been, I think, a sea change in the political culture, and that I think is the important thing. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Dr. Sydnor, do you think these policies of out- lawing political parties that express extremist views can work, or are they going to be counterproductive? Mr. SYDNOR. I don't believe, as long as a party or an organized group is not engaging in violence and breaking the law, I don't think they should be suppressed. A single suppression does in fact establish a precedent, and precedents of that kind become danger- ous as times change and as circumstances vary. I do believe in truth in labeling. I think in a democratic society you ought to label the poison clearly, set it on the table, describe it fully, and then leave it to the judgment and maturity of the people in the society whether or not they want to take the poison. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Dr. Breitman, what does history day about ef- forts of governments to deal with these problems in this way? Mr. BREITMAN. Well, I tend to think that efforts at suppression more often backfire than they succeed. But having said that, and adding my own personal opinion I would prefer not to ban such parties, I would have to say that we do, of course, recognize certain limitations on freedom of speech even in this country. Wasn't it Oliver Wendell Holmes who said it doesn't allow anyone to shout "fire" in a crowded theater. And I can see how Germans, working 111 out their basic law in 1948-49, might have thought that allowing Nazis to carry out political activity openly might represent shout- ing "fire" in a crowded theater. Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you. I appreciate that. I have no further questions, and I appreciate the testimony of the panelists very much. At this point, without objection, I will place in the record a docu- ment submitted on behalf of John Mendelsohn and Donald S. Detwiler regarding the Holocaust. [EDITOR'S NOTE.-Mr. Kostmayer submitted the following docu- ment:] 112 THE HOLOCAUST

11. The Wannsee Protocol and a 1944 Report on Auschwitz by the Office of Strategic Services

Introduction by Robert Wolfe

GARLAND PUBLISHING, INC. NEW YORK - LONDON 1982 113 INTRODUCTION

The notorious so-called Wannsee Protokoll is actually the contemporary official summary of the first of three known Third Reich interagency meetings on "the final solution of the Jewish question." Held on January 20, 1942, at the Wannsee lakeside headquarters of the International Criminal Police Commission on the western edge of Berlin, this relatively high-level meeting included four state secretaries (the American equivalent would be assistant secretary), from the Ministry of Justice. (Dr. Roland Freisler) and the Ministry of the Interior (Dr. Wilhelm Stuckart), from the Four-Year Plan (Erich Neumann), and from the General Government of occupied rump Poland (Dr. Joseph Buehler). Other agencies represented by lesser lights were the Reich Ministry for the Occupied Eastern Territories, the Nazi Party and Reich chancelleries, and the SS Race and Settlement Main Office. Also in attendance were the SS security police com- manders from rump Poland and the occupied Baltic states. Host and presiding officer was Reinhard Heydrich, chief of Security Police and the Security Service, in this case acting in his capacity as head of the Reich Office for Jewish Emigration, an appoint- ment he received from Hermann Goering as plenipotentiary of the Four-Year Plan. With Heydrich were subordinates Heinrich Mueller, chief of the Gestapo, and Adolf Eichmann, special assistant for "the final solution of the Jewish question," who took notes and prepared the summary known as the Wannsee Protocol. Representing the Foreign Office was Under Secretary Martin Luther, director of its domestic division (Abteilung Deutschland),which contained sections DII for liaison with the SS and the police and DIII for advising the German Foreign Service on important domestic matters such as the "Jewish question, racial policy, flags . . . national hymns ... Freemason questions." Luther disappeared, purportedly after an affront to Ribbentrop, in March 1943, and Abteilung Deutschlandwas redesignated Abteilung Inland by early April. The only known extant copy of the Wannsee Protocol, printed here, the sixteenth of thirty numbered copies, was transmitted on January 26 (received March 2) to the Foreign Office with a covering letter from Heydrich announcing a second interagency meeting of lesser officials on March 6 at Kurfurstenstrasse 116, the headquarters o1 Eichmann's IV B 4, where the third meeting on October 27. 1942. was-also held. Copy sixteen was deposited by section DIII in a two-folder Foreign Office file bearing the titde "Final Solution of the Jewish Question" (End/osung derJudenfrage),which contains 114

Foreign Office documents on that subject filed in reverse approximate chronological sequence from January 25, 1939, through November 20, 1943, much of it in near- duplicate drafts or redrafts of memoranda. Allied bombing of Berlin eventually forced evacuation of current records as well as archives to safer locations in the countryside, particularly after irreplaceable Prussian military archives dating as far back as the sixteenth century were destroyed in an Allied incendiary bombing in April 1942. The bulk of the German Foreign Office records were moved in 1943 to KrummhUbel in the Riesengebirge close to the border of Silesia and Czechoslovakia and then in 1944 to the (Lower) Harz Mountains, where Allied troops on April 27,1945, found portions stored for safekeeping in Schloss Falkenstein, Schloss Degenershausen, Burg Falkenstein, and Schloss Stolberg. Moved by May 17 to Marburg Castle, the records were again moved to the 7771 Records Center in Berlin in 1946. They were removed to Whaddon Hall in Bucks, England, during the Berlin blockade of 1948-49, to be returned in the 1950's, after extensive microfilming, to the custody of the Federal German Foreign Office Archives in Bonn, where they may now be con- sulted. The "Final Solution" files of the German Foreign Office open in February 1939 with the designation of Dr. Schumburg as its representative to the just-established Reich Central for Jewish Emigration and Helmut Wohltat to the Rublee discussions. Noting with satisfaction that anti-Semitism spreads wherever Jews emigrate, Schum- burg, in a memorandum of January 25 entitled "The Jewish question as factor of the Foreign Policy in the year 1938," also warns that German means might enable the building of aJewish state as abase from which wealthy Jews could poison the relations of other countries with Nazi Germany. From these modest beginnings subsequent file entries trace a story of German Foreign Office officials and Foreign Service officers being drawn deeper and deeper into the SS "Final Solution," progressing from mere spouters of anti-Semitic bombast to accessories in forced expulsion to eventual fomenters of mass murder of Jews and part-Jews, German and foreign, East European and West European. For a few months following the easy defeat of France in 1940 the file reflected the plan to settle Jews in Madagascar under the governance, literally and figuratively, of a German police state. But however much the energy and paperwork expended, this plan was a stillbirth, although as late as August 1940 the German ambassador and plenipo- tentiary to France, Otto Abetz, isquoted as authority for Hitler's intention to "remove the Jews from Europe after the war." By late June, Heydrich told Ribbentrop that "the Jewish problem cannot be settled anymore through emigration, but must be a 'territorial' final solution." Whether this still referred to Madagascar or more likely to a German police state "reservation" for Jews in the Lublin region of conquered Poland isnot clear. Nonetheless, by the time of the attack on the Soviet Union the concept of Jews as unacceptable security risks brought the establishment and training, during the spring and summer of 1941, of SS Einsatzgruppen to follow German army groups into occupied Eastern Europe to assure rear area security by means that included the unconcealable mass executions and burial of Soviet and other Jews in or near their home communities (see Volume 10 of this series). While a less public resort in the second half of 1941 and the first half of 1942 to gassing \,ans !&>'aderwagen) using carbon monoxide exhaust fumes to kill Jews during transport from their homes to nearby mass graves was also proving inefficient and psychologically burdensome (judging by the piteous complaints of the SS execu- 115 tioners), Heydrich called a meeting for December 9, 1941, to devise more efficient systematic procedures. After a postponement forced by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and the distractions entailed b-ythe Ge man declaration of war on the United States, the best-known of the several interagency meetings dealing with the "Final Solution"was convened at the International Criminal Police Commission, Am Grossen Wannsee Nr. 56/58, on January 20, 1942. After recounting the accomplishments and difficulties of the forced emigration of Jews, Heydrich noted Himmler's prohibition of further emigration because of its "dangers" during wartime and because of the "consideration of the possibilities in the East." He continued, "Another possible solution of the problem has now taken the place of emigration, i.e., the evacuation of the Jews to the East, provided the Fuehrer agrees to this plan. Such activities are, however, to be considered as provisional actions, but practical experience is already being collected which is of greatest impor- tance in relation to the future final solution of the Jewish problem" (translation, p. 22; German, p. 7 of this volume). The Wannsee minutes include a chart (see p. 8; English translation, p. 23) showing the breakdown by countries of an estimated eleven million European Jews who "under proper guidance ...are now to be allocated for labor to the East in the course of the final solution. Able-bodied Jews will be taken in large labor columns to these districts for work on roads, separated according to sexes, in the course of which action a great part will undoubtedly be eliminated by natural causes. The possible final remnant will, as it must undoubtedly consist of the toughest, have to be treated accordingly, as it is the product of natural selection, and would, if liberated, act as a bud cell of a Jewish reconstruction (see historical experience). . . . Europe will be cleaned up from the West to the EasL ...The evacuated Jews will first be sent, group by group, into so-called transit-ghettos- from which they will be taken to the East. . . . The carrying out of each single evacuation project of a larger extent will start at a time to be determined chiefly by the military development" (translation, pp. 24-26; German, pp. 9-U). After January 20, 1942, the "Final Solution" was a settled program, needing no further discussion except as to its application to Mischlinge (mixed breeds) and mixed marriages. Amidst a 'total" war in which most German victories were in the past, it is incredible that so much time and thought of high-placed Third Reich officials was wasted on a "solution" so senseless in its harm to the Nazi war effort and so mindless in its racial fanaticism. The role of the German Foreign Office in this vicious nonsense was to bully Nazi satellites into applying the "Final Solution" to their own Jews. With the notable exceptions of Italy and Hungary, Hitler's allies were not loathe to cooperate, at least to the extent of permitting the SS system operated by Eichmann and Pohl to do the job for them, but the Slovaks and Hungarians sought assurances that they would receive their fair share of the confiscated property of their defunct Jewish nationals. In the last months covered by the Foreign Office "Final Solution" files, from February to November 1943, the main theme is the exploitation for Nazi benefit of the belated Allied and neutral attempt to rescue Jews. With satellite governments anxious to buy favorwith the Allies as the tide of war was obviously turning, Himmler conceded exchanges of Jewish children and adults for interned Axis nationals, provided the Jews were taken anywhere but Palestine, preferably to England. Cynically anticipating a propaganda gain among the Arabs from the expected British refusal. Himmler did 116 order the "hoarding" of small numbers of Jews with claims of neutral or noncontinen- tal nationality. Eyewitness confirmation of the incredible reality of the "Final Solution" of the Jewish question, as planned at the Wannsee meeting and referred to repeatedly by that euphemism in the German Foreign Office Endlosung file, came only late in the war, although much accurate second-hand and circumstantial evidence was available to an incredulous and inattentive world. A cryptic OSS report of August 25, 1942, (#20531), and a detailed report of February 14, 1944, (#81854), drawn from a September 1943 eyewitness account of a Lodz Jew who had recently escaped from the Sonderkom- mando at Treblinka, apparently had little if any dissemination. But the combined eyewitness accounts of Rudolf Vrba and Alfred Wetzler, Slo- vakian Jews who escaped from Auschwitz-Birkenau on April 7, 1944, were available, at least in summary form, to Roswell McCleiland, representative of the War Refugee Board in Bern, Switzerland, as well as in London and Washington before the end of June, although the full version was received in Washington only in early November by John W.Pehle, executive director of the War Refugee Board, whu transmitted a copy to the War Department on November 8. The War Refugee Board made the report public in late November, just about the time Heinrich Himmler ordered the dismantling of the gas chambers of Auschwitz-Birkerau. To a disbelieving query by a former war corre- spondent Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson responded on December 13 with a confession of the belatedness of his own shocked realization of the truth. OSS Field Memorandum 257 (FR-425), datelined Bari, Italy, April 20, 1945, contains the English translation of the Vrba-Wetzler report printed in this volume. It was prepared from amicrofilm copy (brought to Rome by Dr. G.Soos) of the Hungarian translation by Oscar Krasnansky of the original Slovakian language reports dictated to Krasnansky and others by Vrba and Wetzler at Zilina, Slovakia, on April 25 and 26, 1944. The abundance of specific detail, subsequently corroborated by many indepen- dent sources, makes this report the best contemporary evidence for the occurrences from April 1942 to April 1944 at Auschwitz-Birkenau, rightly described by one of the notorious SS "attending physicians," Dr. Heinz Thilo, as the "anus mundi:'

Robert Wolfe 117

T.4)ILATZ0m oF rmww~~j No. sG-2s6s OiTlGS OF CMIEI' CP 0C4EL IJCg WARCRUIE$

(S ta p :£ o o 16th copy -Un~too of ticumsien.

I. The fr11cwinc Peregas toek ;par t 'in the dicudgion final 60J'.itiDA Of abo ut the the Jewish jues"n which took aa 1grosen .Ianzsa Place in Berlin, lio.55/S8 on 20 January 1942. reaulaeter Dr, a~yER and Raichjt*1o Dr. iEL 0 t~r Retch Xinistry for the Occupied Eastern territories CUnder Secretorv of Stato Dr.STUCKBn Rotch Kiristry for * tho Interior UnderSecre~nx.y of Statq ImtJXAM, Peiitnir for the Four-Yoaj, Pln Under Secretary of State Dr.E5S 1Z - hatch Rintstry of 18 3 Vndor ecrat.-ry of State Dr.BtUEHIjM Ofieo tsGoo 17afertaateskrtaar IVTHMq Forot&1A Offico SS-Oberfuehver XLI Party Ch=ncolicry Vio aertadirektor XRIZIVOM Botch ChnnaccIflory

(hendvrltten note)s D 111. 29 Top Secret. 118

P4AX5LCICki OF DCCUfLITVO. NO-2586 CCVTIMJLD

SS-ruppeafuehrer ECafAY Race e. Sottloment nAlo Offico

S-&ruppenfuehrar KUL= Rech Main Security Office SS-Obers turmbanofuebror £LCIYAi

SS-Oberfuebrer Dr. S6MENGATH Zecurity Police ant SD Chief of the Security Polie end the SD in the Government General

SS-.Sturmbe.nfuehrer Dr.LUCZ Secrity" olico and SD Comander of the Secrity Police - and the SD for the General-distrtct Zetvia, as deputy of the Commander of the Security Police and the SD for the Reich Comi ertat"Eaetland'.

II. At the beginin; of the discussion SS-Obrgruppenfucbror

IffWICH gave information that the Reich Maral-l bad appointed im

delegate for the preparations for the final solution of the Jowiah

problem in Europe and pointed out that this discussion had been

called for the purpose of clarifying fundamental questionn. The

Wish of the Reich Harshal to have a draft sent to him concerning

orp .aatm7, factual and material interested in relation to the

final solution of the Jevish problem to Europe, makes necessary an

initial comm= acti-on of ali Central Offices immeiately concerned

with dhse quetiox in order to bring their deeral activities

into line.

-2 - 119

TRUSLATIWOCF DOCMU4ET Ilo, 1-2596 Ck!T IFJLD

Ee saA that the Reich Fue!-rer-SS and the Chief of the German

Police (Chief of the Security Police and the SD) was entrusted with

the official hahnling of the final solution of the Jewish problem

centrally without regard to geographic borders.

The Chief of the Security Police and the SD then gave a short

report of the struggle which has been carried on against this enemy,

the essential points being the following:

a) the expulsion -of the Jews from every particular sphere of

life of the Germen people,

b) the expulsion of the Jews from the Loboneraun of the Gernea

people.

ln cariying out these efforts, an increased and plarned accel-

20 eration of the emigration of Jews from the Reich territory wee start-

ed, as the only possible present solution.

By order of the Reich Marehabl a Reich Central Office for Jew-

ish emigration was set up in January 1939 and the Chief of the Se-

curity Police end SD was entrusted with the management. Its most

Important tasics were

a) to miuke all nccessary, rrenceaests for the proraration for

an increased emigration of the Jews,

b) to direct the flow of i-igration, c) to hurry up the proceiarc of emigration in e.ch ldi'ii l

The aim of all this being t.at of clea=ring the 'trman Leber.s-

rsua of Jews in a legal way.

-3- 120

TRAFSLILTIaS OF P00EkXT No. FG4,586 con I irrED

All the Offices realized the drawbacks of much enforced ac- celerated emigration. 7cr the time being they had, however, toler- ated it on account of the lack of other possible solutions of te problem.

The work concerned with emigration was, later on, not only a German problem, bat also a problem with which the authorities of the cotztries to which the flow of emigrants was being directed would have to deal. Financial difficulties, such as the demand for increasing sums of ~moeyto be presented at the time of the _ landing on the part of various foreign g-overnments, lack of ship- ping space, increasing restrict ion of entry permit, or cancel- lizg of such, extrardinarily increased the difficulties of eri- grati n. In spite nf these difficulties 537 000 Jews were sent cut of the country between the day of the seizure of power and 21 the deadline 31 October 1941. Of those as from 30 January from

Germany proper aprex. 380.00 from 15 March 1938 from Austria (estmark)appr.147.OOC from 15 March 1939 from the Protectorate, 3ohOla and Moravia a.pr. 30.000.

'lA Jews themselves, s/rather their Jowish political or- ganizations financed the emigration. In order to avoid the pos- sibility of the Imorerished Jews staying be ind, action was ta::en to male the veaithyJews finance the evacation of the reirjen, this was arrange d by imposing a suittblo tax, i.c. an emtcration- tax v-hich %v.s used for the financial arransenc"ts in connection vith the ezfiratico cf ;oor Jews. ant was -or!ci according to a ladle: oysten.

- 4 - 121

TLLSl.&TIWU OF DOCMENTNo. SQ-2586 COCUTINIMD

Apart fro0 the ncessary Reicbnark-exchanes. foreign currency.

had to be presented at tha time of the landing. In order to saTo

foreign exchange hed by ern-ay, the Jewish financial establishments

in foreign countries wore - with the telp of Jewish organizations in

Cernany - made responsible for arranging for an adequate amount, bf

foreign currency. Up to 30 October 1941, the foreign Jews donated

approx. 4 9,500,000.

In the meantino the Reich Fue)hror-SS and Chief of the German

Police had prohibited emiration of Jews fcr reasons of tho dangers

of an emigration during war-time and consideration of the possibi-

lities in the East.

III. Another possible solution of the problem has now taken theslaco of eittration. i.e. the evacuation of the Jews to the East, 22 provided the Fuehrer aeKroes to this plan.

Such activities are, however, to be considered as provisional

actions, but practical experience Is already being collected which

Is of greatest importance in relation to the future final solution

of the Jewish problem.

Approx. 11,000,000 Jews /will be involved in this final solution of the European problem, they are distributed as follows amon the

countries:

- 5 - 122

AU1z10 Or D00WWNT 11o.I1G-ZU56

Country Numbor

Germany proper 131,800 kne trla 43,700 Zastern territoria- 4RO.0C0 General Oovornment 2.284.000 3talystok 400,000 Protectorato Bohemia & Moravia 74.200 Estonia - no Jews - Latvia 3,500 Lithuania 34,000' 3 elgium 43.000 Denmark 5,600 France / Occupied France 165,C00 Unoccupied Fraaico 700,000 GTeoco 69,600 Netherlands- 160,800 iorway, 1,300

" Bulgaria 48,000 nglani 330,000 Finland 2,300 Irelend 4,000 Italy inel. Sardtnia 58,C00 Albania 200 Croatia 40,000 Portugal 43,000 Rouzenia, incl.Bosearabla 342, CO0 .o3den 8,0OQ Switzerla.d 18,000 Serbia 10,000 Slovakia 88.000 Spain 6,000 55,500 Turkey (Euro:an Turke 5 / Hui-ary/ 742,800 USSR 5,000,0C0 %=, ain o e,994,6a4 Vaito Eussia with exception of Bialystok 446,484

Total over 11,000,000

-6- 123

Th.LSLCLOE aF DOCOASJTit,. IC-2586

The m bor cf Jews given here for forest countries includes,

however, only those Jews who still adhere tn the Jewish faith as

the definition of the ter "Jew according to racial principles

Is still pextially missing thero. The handling of the problem

in tho individual countries will meet with difficulties dun to

the attitude and conception of the people there, especially in

Sung ry and Rouania. Thu., eve-% today a Jew can buy documents in

Eimgary which vil-- officially prove his foreign citizenship.

The influmnce of the Jews in all walks of life In the USSR

is well know. Ipproximately 5 million Jews are living in the

European Russia, and in Asiatic Russia scarcely 1/4 million. Jews The breakdown of residing In the European part of the USSR,

24 according to trades, was approximately as follows:

it agriculture 9,1 communal workers- 14,8 in trade 20,0 employed by thes.te 23,4% in private occupations such as medical profes- sion, newspapers, theater, etc. 32,7

Under proper Vidanco Jews are now to be allocated for

labor to the East In the course of the final solution. Able-

bodie& Jews will be token in large labor coluns to these districts

for work or roads, separated according to sexes, la he cozrse of

which action a Creat part will undoubtedly be elimineted by

r.atral causes.

- 7 - 124

ThANSIATION Of DOCUM Yo.0-2586

The possible final rezmnt will. as it oust undoubtedly

consist of tho toutgheSt, hae to b. treated accordingly. as it

is the product of natural selection, and would, if liberated,

act as a bud cell of a Jewish reconstruction (see historical

experience.)

In the course of the practical execution of this final sett-

lesent of the pro'bleF-urope will 'be cleaned up from the West to

the Sa t. Germany proper, including the protectorate lohemia and

Moravia, will have to be handled first because of reasons of

housing and other social-political neceosities.

The evacuated Jove will first be sent, group by group, into

so-celled transit-ghettos from which they will be taken to the

last. 25

SS-0bergruppenfuehrer IMAZCH went on to say that an in-

portent provision for the evacuation as s ch is the exact definition

of the group of persons concerned in the matter.

It is 'intended not to evacuate Jove of more than 65 years

of age but to bend them to an old-age-ghotto - Theresiensedt

is being considered f;r this purpose.

Wozt to these age-groups - of the 280,OOC Jews still in

Germany proper end Austria on 31 October 1941, approximately 30,

are over 65; Jews disalled on active duty ani Jews rith war-

decorations (Iron Cross I) will to cccepto- in the Jewish- old-

age-ghettos.

- 8-

4. - ....- 125

MJJIhTIQ OF DOCtHDCI )1o. 0-2586 CONTIIZ

Thr grh such expedient solution the numborous interventions will

be eliminated with ore blow.

Th6 carrying out of each single evacuation project of a

larger extent will start at a time to be determined chiefly by

theajlitary development. Regarding the handling of the final

solution in the European territories occupied and influenced

by us it was suggested that the competent officials of the Foreici

Office working en these questions confer with the competent 'Re-

a ferenten from the Security Police end the SD,

In Slovakia and Croatia the difficulties arising froze this

question have been considerably reduced, as the oest eieential

problems t this field hare already been brought near to a eolut-

ion. In Rounania the Goverrment in the meantime has also appo~nt-

ad a commissioner for Jewish questions. In order to settle the

question in Eung&y it is imerative that'an adviser: in Jewish

questions be pressed upon the Eungarian government without too

much delay.

As regards the taking of preparatory steps to settle the

question in Italy SS-C'berCrupe/fuohrer KE"WIDH considers it

opportune to contec: the chief of the police with a view to

these problems.

In the occupied and unoccupied ;arts of France the regist-

ration of the Jews for evacuati:n can in all probability be ex-

pected tc take place without Creat difficulties.

Assistat- Under secretary of State LJTfLH in this connection

cells etteution t the fact t at ir some countries, such a the

Scendinario. states, difficulties will crise if these problems are

dealt with th roughly and t-at it will b6 therefore advisalle to

defer pctior in these countries.

-t' ~,. 126

TIMSAToV oF DOum Z o,NG-586 COHTI4ED

Besides, considering the mall number. of Jove to be evacuated from

these countries this deferment means not essential limitation.

On the other hand, the Foreign Office anticipates no great

difficulties as far as the South-East and the -Vest of Europo are

concerned. -

SS-Gruppenfuehrar IMAJ intend to send an official from the

ain Race an& Settlement Office to Hungary for General orientation

at the time vhen the first active steps to trying up the question

in this cowntry will be taken by the Chief of the" Security Police

and the SD. It was determined officially to detail this official,

ieho is not supposed to Vork actively, tomporarily from the Main Raco and Settlement Office as assistant to the police attache. IT. The implementation of the final solution-problea to supposed 27

to a certain extent to be based on the Nuernberg Laws, in which

cozncction also the solution of the problems presented by the mixed-

carriages and the persons of mixed blood is seen to be conditional

to en absolutely final clarification ef the question.

The chief of the Security Police ar the SD first discussed, with reference to a letter from/a Chief of the Reich Chancellery,

tho following points theoretically:

1) Treatment of Persons of IfixedBlood of the first Degree.

Persons of mixed blood of the first deree will, as regar.n the final solution of tho levish question. be treated as Jews.

- 10 -

I: 127

TRA±GLATIWUOF DOG*A*MMNo. NO.4586 COTINMD

From this treatment the following persons wili be except:

a) Persons of mimcd blood of "the first degree married to persons of ormaa blood if their marriage has resulted in children (persons of mixed blood of the second degree). Such persons of mixed blood of the second degree are to be treated essentially as Germans. -

b) Persona of mixed blood of the first degree to whom up till now in any sphere of li:e whatsoever exemption licenses hame been issued by the highest Party or State authorities.

Each individual case must be eiaained. in which process it will still be possible that a decision unfavorable to the persons of mixed blood can be passed.

In any such case only personal essential merit of the person

of mixed blood oust be deemed a ground Justifying_ the granting of

an exemption. ( ot merits of the parent or of the partner of

German blool.)

2Any person of mixod blood of thb first degree to whom ezeption

from tha evacuation ts granted will be sterilized - in order to

eliminate the possibility of offspring and to secure a final solut-.

ion of the problem presented by the persons of aixed blood. The

sterilization will take place on a voluntary basis. But It will be

conditional to a permission to stay In the geich. Following the

sterilizations the "person ofyIxe d blood' will be liberated fro

ill restrictive regulations which have so far been imposed upon

him.

2) Treatment cf Persons of Mixed Blood of the Second -eree. Persons of mixed blood of the second deg-ee ill fundamentally

be treated as persons of Ceral.h blood, "with exception of tr.e fol- lowi; casesin which persons of mixed blood of the second degree

will be treotetias Je's: 128

TRANSLLVZI O DOCUXaN,b 7G-;5e CONTIVUD

a) The parson of mixed blood of the second degree is the rsult of a marriage where both parents are persons of mixed blood.

b) The general appearance of the person of mixed blood of the second degree is racially particularly objectionable so that he alreadT outwardly must be included among the Jws.

c) The person of cixed blood of the second degree has a particularly bad police and political record sufficient to reveal that he feels and behaves like a Jew.

But also in these case e=ptions are not to be made :t %*.a person of mixed blood of the second degree is married to a person of German blood.

3) Marriages between Full Jews an& Persons of German Blood. gere it must be decided from one individual cane to another whether the Jewish partner is to be evacuated, or whether In con 29 sleration of the effects produced by such measure upon the German

relatives of the mixed marriage he is to be committed to a ghetto for aged Je7s.

4) Karriages between Persons of Mixed Blood cf the First Degree and Persons of German Blood.

a) Without Children.

If no children have resulted from the marriagse the parents

of mixed blood of the first degree will be evacuated or normitted

to a ghetto for old Jews. (The same treatment as in the case of

marriages between full Jews and persons of Gerzan 'lood, Point 3). 129

ZeIMS-aTIOV OF *=NDST No. N g5gg CONTI14VED

b) With Children

If the aarri r ?.Q rqfsultqA in chtldron (persons of mixed

blood of the second degree)'these children viii be eva-

cuated or committed to a ghetto together with the parents

of mixed blood of the first degree, if they are to be

treated as Jews. If the children are to be treated as

Germans (regular eases) they will be except from eva-

cuation and LA that case the same applies to the parent

of mixed blood of the first degree.

5) marriages between Persons of Mixed Blood of the First Degree ndPar;ons cf Mi;d Blo of t Fir;t ;e; ;reeorJew-.

In the case of these zarrieagos (including the children) all nm-

bers of the family will be treated as Jew., therefore evacuated or cointtod to a ghetto for old Jaw.

6) Mariages betaen Persons of MKixed Blood of the First Degree and Persons cf Mixed Blood of the Second Degree.

Both partners will be evacuated, regardless of whether or not

they have children, or comito to a ghetto f3r old Jews, since

as a rule these children will racially reveal the ad-mixture ef

Jewish blood more strongly than persons of mixed bloo, of the

second degree.

SS- ruppenushrar HU&)&N advocates the opinion tt.at sterili-

zation must be applied on a large scale; in particular as tre person of mixed blood

-13- 130

TR&UOIAT1ZWOP DOCLt go. klG-2S86 CONTIYM

placed before the alternative as whether to be evacuated or to 'b

sterilized, would rather submitto the sterilization.

Undor Secretary of State Dr. SXUCWP maintains that the

possible solutione generated above for a clarification of the

problems presented&by ded marriage, and by osr,n of mixod

blood wbem translated into practice in this foruwould involve

endless adaii ative. work. In the second place,* as the bin-

lo0ical facts cannot be dsregardaed in cny case, it was sugg-est-.

od by Pr. STL=XLRTto proceed to forced sterilization.

further, for the pupose of simplifying the problem of

mixed marria4se it would 'berequired to coneidor how it would

be possible to attain the object that the legislator can do-

claro OThis marriage. hs been dissolved, a 31

Regarding the quaettion of the effects produced by the -

evacuation of the Jews on the economic life, Under Secratar7

of State. bU declared that the Jew, assigned to work in plants of Importance for the war could not be evacuated as long as no replacement was available.

SS-Obergruppenfuehrer WYMICH pointed out that besides, according to the directives. approved by him governing the car- rying out of the evacuation program in operation at that tie, these Jews would not 'e evacuated.}f (Page 14a of "original) Under Secretary of State Dr'.MMU£E stated th.at it a.ol4 be welcomed by the Governoent enaerl if the impleaentatior of the fi.al solution of this question could zatrt in t-eGovern- ment General, because the transportaticoproblem there vas of no predominant Importance

-14- -14a- 131

TRANSLATION01 Un1. 5G-2586

and the progress of this action would not be hampered by con-

siderations connected with the supply of labor. The Jow had

to bi removed as quickly as possible from the territory of the

Government General because especially there the Jove represented

an intense danger as a carrier of epidemics. and on the other

hand were permanently coatributinq to the disorganization of

the enomic system of the country through black market oper-

ations. Moereover, out of the" two and a half million Jews to be

affected, the majority of cases was upfitt.,for.work.

Under Secretary of State EiHfl further stated that the

solution of the Jewish question In the Governmant General as

far as the issuing of orders was concerned was dependent upon

32 the chief of the Security Police and the SD, his work being supported by the administrative authorities of the Government

General. oehad this one request only, namely that the

Jevish question in this territory be solved as quickly as

possible.

Towards the end of conference the various typee o

possible solutions were discussed; in the course of this dis-

cussion auleiter Dr. XYfl as wall as Under Secretary of State

Dr. BIEUT advocated the view that curtain preparatory cams-

wras incidental to the carrying out 4f the firal solution ou;ht

to be inltiated Immediately ia the very territories under dis-

cussion, in which process, however, laring the population must

be avoided.

ith the request to the persons present frm the Chief of

the Security Police acd the SD t-et they lend him appropriate

assistance In the caring out of thb.teaks involved In the so-

lutior., the conference was adjourned. 132

Mr. KOSTMAYER. Thank you very much. The subcommittee stands adjourned. [Whereupon, at 4:50 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 0

ISBN 0-16-038532-6 9 JO 90000

4780160283