Open A. Niebauer Master S Thesis

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Open A. Niebauer Master S Thesis The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School Communication Arts and Science CONSTRUCTIONS OF GUILT AND LOGICS OF PUNISHMENT: AMERICAN NARRATIVES OF GERMAN GUILT AFTER WORLD WAR II A Thesis in Communication Arts and Sciences by Allison Morris Niebauer © 2016 Allison Morris Niebauer Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts August 2016 The thesis of Allison Morris Niebauer was reviewed and approved* by the following: Stephen Howard Browne Professor of Communication Arts and Sciences Thesis Advisor Thomas W. Benson Edwin Erle Sparks Professor Emeritus of Rhetoric Michele Kennerly Assistant Professor of Communication Arts and Sciences John Gastil Department Head and Professor of Communication Arts and Sciences *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School iii ABSTRACT This thesis investigates how American war crime planners conceived of German guilt after World War II, and how it influenced their prescriptions for punishment. I examine three separate proposals for the punishment of German war criminals and the rhetorical, philosophical, and material ramifications of each. Using different aspects of narrative theory, I explore how each construction of guilt created a different propulsive logic for punishment. Recognizing that narratives have consequences both within and outside the story, I argue that each plan highlights a different conception of the relationship between guilt and punishment. The logics promoted by each plan have been carried into different aspects of transitional justice today and continue to demand that we examine how we construct guilt and conceive of punishment in the wake of tragedy. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION: NARRATING GUILT AND NEGOTIATING PUNISHMENT………...….1 Background and Overview..................................................................................................2 The Function of Narrative in the Construction of Guilt......................................................4 Chapter 1: Guilt and Punishment in the Morgenthau Plan..................................................8 Chapter 2: Guilt and Punishment in the Bernays Plan.......................................................10 Chapter 3: Guilt and Punishment in the Final Agreement and Charter for the Nuremberg Trial....................................................................................................................................12 Conclusion.........................................................................................................................13 Chapter 1. COLLECTIVE GUILT AND PUNISHMENT IN THE MORGENTHAU PLAN.....15 America Moves towards a Plan.........................................................................................17 Lobbying for the Plan........................................................................................................23 Morgenthau’s Hierarchy of Guilt.......................................................................................29 A Moral Failing Requires a Moral Punishment: Jaspers and Morgenthau........................42 Conclusion: The Legacy of the Morgenthau Plan.............................................................46 Chapter 2. ENSHRINGING POLITICAL DOCTRINE INTO LAW: THE CONSTRUCTION OF GERMAN GUILT IN THE BERNAYS PLAN......................................................................51 Conspiring to Construct a Conspiracy, September 15, 1944.............................................55 Backlash against the September 15, 1944 Memo..............................................................59 Clarifying the Conspiracy: the November 11, 1944 Memo...............................................62 The Final Draft: January 22, 1944.....................................................................................66 Enshrining Public Morality into Law................................................................................73 Constructing an Individual Account of German Guilt.......................................................75 Political Will as Legal Innovation: Appeasing the Audience of Lawmakers....................79 Conclusion: Implications of the Bernays Plan...................................................................86 Chapter 3. NARRATIVE UNITY AND CRIMES AGAINST PEACE…..……………..............90 Solidifying American War Crimes Policy, April-May, 1945……………………………91 Negotiating at the London Conference, June-August, 1945............................................103 The Final Agreement and Charter for the Nuremberg Trial, August, 1945....................107 Consequences of a Conspiracy to Commit Crimes Against Peace..................................115 Punishment as Deterrence................................................................................................119 Conclusion: Evaluating the Nuremberg Legacy…………………………………….….122 CONCLUSION: THE CONSEQUENCES OF OUR STORIES................................................126 Material Implications of German Guilt Narratives…………………………………………….127 v Rhetorical and Philosophical Implications of German Guilt Narratives……………………….134 Bibliography................................................................................................................................137 1 Introduction Narrating Guilt and Negotiating Punishment In the wake of unspeakable tragedy, members of society privately and publically debate where to lay blame. Individuals and groups formulate accusations of blame, and demand that the perpetrators be punished. Nowhere is this more clear than in situations of transitional justice when institutional change is followed by demands for the redress of past transgressions. Members of society grapple with the past, a process which involves a rhetorical negotiation of transgression: what exactly happened, who did it happen to, and what made it wrong? Far from a foregone conclusion, the question of who is guilty of a specific transgression, why they are guilty, and what constitutes guilt is a matter of rhetorical significance. How these questions are negotiated creates the basis for a model of transitional justice.1 Such negotiations, whether they are conducted by a few people, as in the case of trials or engaged in by a nation, as in the case of Truth and Reconciliation Commissions, are inherently rhetorical acts. They limit, persuade, propel and create action. The rationale of guilt and culpability propels arguments for punishment, just as considerations of the end goal of justice shapes and tempers it. The rhetorical process of these negotiations have material consequences for the fate of the accused. A rhetorical study of guilt and punishment within transitional justice models attempts to understand how guilt is construed and negotiated, and how it seeks to defend and prescribe punishment. This study seeks 1 By using the term “transitional justice,” I am referring to the academic study of how societies transition from periods of conflict or repressive rule to a different form of government or rule. The use of the term “model” refers to the different practices employed by society in order to address past grievances and enable future governance. Examples of these practices include judicial and non-judicial measures such as criminal prosecutions, truth commissions, reparations, official apologies, and institutional reforms. Transitional justice as a specific and separate field of inquiry has emerged within the last thirty years, though the practices it purports to examine have been in used in different forms for centuries. It is necessarily inter-disciplinary, reaching into Law, Political Science, Security Studies, Peace Studies, and Sociology, to name but a few disciplines. For more information on the study of transitional justice, see Neil J. Kritz, ed., Transitional Justice: How Emerging Democracies Reckon with Former Regimes, 3 vols. (Washington D.C: United States Institute of Peace Press, 1995). 2 to understand the cultural, moral, philosophical and practical beliefs that shape projections of guilt and punishment. It analyzes the basis of transitional justice models, in the hope that it may clarify why particular models are used in specific situations and how they shape the future of the country utilizing them. Although this is a broad subject, each case study in which a country underwent a regime change after violent conflict presents a specific instance in which a transitional justice model was created and utilized. My project takes up a case study with one such transitional justice model. I examine the Nuremberg Trial system by examining the negotiations of guilt and punishment of Nazi war criminals conducted by American officials between August 1944 and October 1945. The Nuremberg Trials were not created solely by American officials. Indeed, the final trial plan was reached after extensive negotiations involving the British, French and Soviet Union governments. Recognizing the limits of excluding international deliberations, this study deliberately focuses on the negotiations that were conducted by American officials because they were largely responsible for the formation of the final trial plan. Narrowing this case study to the American negotiations over the judicial redress of past atrocities highlights competing rationales about the telos of punishment. Background and Overview Concerns over how to deal with the perpetrators of the Nazi holocaust started in the United States in 1942 and continued throughout the war. The Moscow Declaration of 1943 announced the intention of the
Recommended publications
  • The Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training Foreign Affairs Oral History Project
    The Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training Foreign Affairs Oral History Project JOHN W. MCDONALD Interviewed by: Charles Stuart Kennedy Initial interview date: June 5, 1997 Copyright 2 3 ADST TABLE OF CONTENTS Background Born in Ko lenz, Germany of U.S. military parents Raised in military bases throughout U.S. University of Illinois Berlin, Germany - OMGUS - Intern Program 1,4.-1,50 1a2 Committee of Allied Control Council Morgenthau Plan Court system Environment Currency reform Berlin Document Center Transition to State Department Allied High Commission Bonn, Germany - Allied High Commission - Secretariat 1,50-1,52 The French Office of Special Representative for Europe General 6illiam Draper Paris, France - Office of the Special Representative for Europe - Staff Secretary 1,52-1,54 U.S. Regional Organization 7USRO8 Cohn and Schine McCarthyism State Department - Staff Secretariat - Glo al Briefing Officer 1,54-1,55 Her ert Hoover, 9r. 9ohn Foster Dulles International Cooperation Administration 1,55-1,5, E:ecutive Secretary to the Administration Glo al development Area recipients P1480 Point Four programs Anti-communism Africa e:perts African e:-colonies The French 1and Grant College Program Ankara, Turkey -CENTO - U.S. Economic Coordinator 1,5,-1,63 Cooperation programs National tensions Environment Shah of Iran AID program Micro2ave projects Country mem ers Cairo, Egypt - Economic Officer 1,63-1,66 Nasser AID program Soviets Environment Surveillance P1480 agreement As2an Dam Family planning United Ara ic Repu lic 7UAR8 National
    [Show full text]
  • Excerpt from Elizabeth Borgwardt, the Nuremberg Idea: “Thinking Humanity” in History, Law & Politics, Under Contract with Alfred A
    Excerpt from Elizabeth Borgwardt, The Nuremberg Idea: “Thinking Humanity” in History, Law & Politics, under contract with Alfred A. Knopf. DRAFT of 10/24/16; please do not cite or quote without author’s permission Human Rights Workshop, Schell Center for International Human Rights, Yale Law School November 3, 2016, 12:10 to 1:45 pm, Faculty Lounge Author’s Note: Thank you in advance for any attention you may be able to offer to this chapter in progress, which is approximately 44 double-spaced pages of text. If time is short I recommend starting with the final section, pp. 30-42. I look forward to learning from your reactions and suggestions. Chapter Abstract: This history aims to show how the 1945-49 series of trials in the Nuremberg Palace of Justice distilled the modern idea of “crimes against humanity,” and in the process established the groundwork for the modern international human rights regime. Over the course of the World War II era, a 19th century version of crimes against humanity, which might be rendered more precisely in German as Verbrechen gegen die Menschlichkeit (crimes against “humane-ness”), competed with and was ultimately co-opted by a mid-20th- century conception, translated as Verbrechen gegen die Menschheit (crimes against “human- kind”). Crimes against humaneness – which Hannah Arendt dismissed as “crimes against kindness” – were in effect transgressions against traditional ideas of knightly chivalry, that is, transgressions against the humanity of the perpetrators. Crimes against humankind – the Menschheit version -- by contrast, focused equally on the humanity of victims. Such extreme atrocities most notably denied and attacked the humanity of individual victims (by denying their human rights, or in Arendt’s iconic phrasing, their “right to have rights”).
    [Show full text]
  • In a Rather Emotional State?' the Labour Party and British Intervention in Greece, 1944-5
    ORE Open Research Exeter TITLE 'In a rather emotional state?' The Labour party and British intervention in Greece, 1944-5 AUTHORS Thorpe, Andrew JOURNAL The English Historical Review DEPOSITED IN ORE 12 February 2008 This version available at http://hdl.handle.net/10036/18097 COPYRIGHT AND REUSE Open Research Exeter makes this work available in accordance with publisher policies. A NOTE ON VERSIONS The version presented here may differ from the published version. If citing, you are advised to consult the published version for pagination, volume/issue and date of publication 1 ‘IN A RATHER EMOTIONAL STATE’? THE LABOUR PARTY AND BRITISH INTERVENTION IN GREECE, 1944-45* Professor Andrew Thorpe Department of History University of Exeter Exeter EX4 4RJ Tel: 01392-264396 Fax: 01392-263305 Email: [email protected] 2 ‘IN A RATHER EMOTIONAL STATE’? THE LABOUR PARTY AND BRITISH INTERVENTION IN GREECE, 1944-45 As the Second World War drew towards a close, the leader of the Labour party, Clement Attlee, was well aware of the meagre and mediocre nature of his party’s representation in the House of Lords. With the Labour leader in the Lords, Lord Addison, he hatched a plan whereby a number of worthy Labour veterans from the Commons would be elevated to the upper house in the 1945 New Years Honours List. The plan, however, was derailed at the last moment. On 19 December Attlee wrote to tell Addison that ‘it is wiser to wait a bit. We don’t want by-elections at the present time with our people in a rather emotional state on Greece – the Com[munist]s so active’.
    [Show full text]
  • Move Away from Bits Framework: a Need for Multilateral Investment Treaty?
    Working Paper No. 15/2017 | November 2017 Move away from BITs framework: A need for multilateral investment treaty? Malebakeng Agnes Forere Senior Lecturer University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg [email protected] The objective of this paper is to critically evaluate the desirability of multilateral treaty that will take into account the needs of developed and developing countries alike as developed nations seek to protect their investment abroad while developing nations want to attract investment, be able to regulate and most importantly they want to limit access to international arbitration. In achieving this objective, the paper will give a snapshot of recent developments indicating a shift away from BITs framework, international investment arbitration and what was considered customary international law of investment. Following from these highlights, the paper will then consider the need of multilateral investment treaty against the current developments. Further, the paper will then discuss how such a multilateral treaty should look like in order to get a buy-in from both the developed and developing nations. Research for this paper was funded by the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs under the SECO / WTI Academic Cooperation Project, based at the World Trade Institute of the University of Bern, Switzerland. SECO working papers are preliminary documents posted on the WTI website (www.wti.org) and widely circulated to stimulate discussion and critical comment. These papers have not been formally edited. Citations should refer to a “SECO / WTI Academic Cooperation Project” paper with appropriate reference made to the author(s). Move away from BITs framework: A need for multilateral investment treaty? Malebakeng Agnes Forere* I.
    [Show full text]
  • American and British Reactions to Mexico's Expropriation of Foreign Oil Properties, 1937-1943
    THE DIPLOMACY OF EXPROPRIATION: AMERICAN AND BRITISH REACTIONS TO MEXICO'S EXPROPRIATION OF FOREIGN OIL PROPERTIES, 1937-1943 Catherine E. Jayne Submitted for the Degree of Ph.D., Arts Department of International History London School of Economics University of London November 1997 UMI Number: U111299 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U111299 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 ^<3 32 S191 H S3S: 2 ABSTRACT On 18 March 1938 Mexican labour problems in the oil industry culminated in Mexican President Ldzaro Cdrdenas' decision to expropriate the holdings of 17 American, Dutch and British oil companies.^ The purpose of this thesis is to fill the gaps in the literature on the Mexican oil nationalisation by analyzing the policies of the oil companies, and comparing and analyzing in detail how policy was determined in both Britain and the United States at a time when Britain was trying to win US cooperation in the face of increasing hostilities in Europe and the Far East. While Whitehall wanted US cooperation in taking a firm stance against Mexico, Washington refused.
    [Show full text]
  • Europe's Rebirth After the Second World War
    Journal of the British Academy, 3, 167–183. DOI 10.5871/jba/003.167 Posted 5 October 2015. © The British Academy 2015 Out of the ashes: Europe’s rebirth after the Second World War, 1945–1949 Raleigh Lecture on History read 2 July 2015 IAN KERSHAW Fellow of the Academy Abstract: This lecture seeks to explain why the Second World War, the most destruc- tive conflict in history, produced such a contrasting outcome to the First. It suggests that the Second World War’s maelstrom of destruction replaced a catastrophic matrix left by the First — of heightened ethnic, border and class conflict underpinned by a deep and prolonged crisis of capitalism — by a completely different matrix: the end of Germany’s great-power ambitions, the purging of the radical Right and widescale ethnic cleansing, the crystallisation of Europe’s division, unprecedented rates of economic growth and the threat of nuclear war. Together, these self-reinforcing components, all rooted in what soon emerged as the Cold War, conditioned what in 1945 had seemed highly improbable: Europe’s rise out of the ashes of the ruined continent to lasting stability, peace and prosperity. Keywords: Cold War, Germany, ethnic cleansing, economic growth, matrix, Europe’s division, radical Right, nuclear war. It is a great honour to deliver this Raleigh Lecture. When invited to do so, I was asked, in the context of the 70th anniversary of the end of the most terrible war in history, to speak on some topic related to the end of the Second World War. As the war recedes into history the recognition has grown that it was the epicentre and determin- ing episode in the 20th century in Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Yalta, a Tripartite Negotiation to Form the Post-War World Order: Planning for the Conference, the Big Three’S Strategies
    YALTA, A TRIPARTITE NEGOTIATION TO FORM THE POST-WAR WORLD ORDER: PLANNING FOR THE CONFERENCE, THE BIG THREE’S STRATEGIES Matthew M. Grossberg Submitted to the faculty of the University Graduate School in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in the Department of History, Indiana University August 2015 Accepted by the Graduate Faculty, Indiana University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. Master’s Thesis Committee ______________________________ Kevin Cramer, Ph. D., Chair ______________________________ Michael Snodgrass, Ph. D. ______________________________ Monroe Little, Ph. D. ii ©2015 Matthew M. Grossberg iii Acknowledgements This work would not have been possible without the participation and assistance of so many of the History Department at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis. Their contributions are greatly appreciated and sincerely acknowledged. However, I would like to express my deepest appreciation to the following: Dr. Anita Morgan, Dr. Nancy Robertson, and Dr. Eric Lindseth who rekindled my love of history and provided me the push I needed to embark on this project. Dr. Elizabeth Monroe and Dr. Robert Barrows for being confidants I could always turn to when this project became overwhelming. Special recognition goes to my committee Dr. Monroe Little and Dr. Michael Snodgrass. Both men provided me assistance upon and beyond the call of duty. Dr. Snodgrass patiently worked with me throughout my time at IUPUI, helping my writing progress immensely. Dr. Little came in at the last minute, saving me from a fate worse than death, another six months of grad school. Most importantly, all credit is due Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • The International Court of Justice
    STRUCTURE OF THE UNITED NATIONS 731 COMMITTEE ON CLASSIFICATION OF COMMUNICATIONS AD HOC COMMITTEE ON THE BASIC QUESTIONNAIRE Appointed at end of 24th session to serve until end of 25th session: Australia, United Arab Republic. Chairman: J. A. Forsythe (Australia). Re-appointed at end of 25th session to serve until Members: Australia, India. end of 26th session: Australia, United Arab Re- public. THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE The Court consists of 15 Judges elected for nine-year PARTIES TO THE COURT S STATUTE terms by the General Assembly and the Security All members of the United Nations are ipso facto Council, voting independently. parties to the Statute of the International Court of The Judges of the Court serving in 1960, with the Justice. The following non-member states have also year their terms of office were due to end, were, in become parties to the Court's Statute: Liechtenstein, order of precedence, as follows: San Marino, Switzerland. Country of End of Judge Nationality Term STATES ACCEPTING COMPULSORY JURISDICTION Helge Klaestad, President Norway 1961 OF THE COURT Sir Muhammad Zafrulla Declarations made by the following states accepting Khan, Vice-President Pakistan 1961 the Court's compulsory jurisdiction (or made under Jules Basdevant France 1964 the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Green Hackworth United States 1961 Justice and deemed to be an acceptance of the juris- Bohdan Winiarski Poland 1967 diction of the International Court for the period for Abdel Hamid Badawi United Arab 1967 which they still had to run), were in force at the end Republic of 1960: Australia, Belgium, Cambodia, Canada, Enrique C.
    [Show full text]
  • Sovereignty Over, Ownership Of, and Access to Natural Resources
    ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS AND THEIR ENFORCEMENT – Vol. II - Sovereignty, Ownership of, and Access to Natural Resources - Leo-Felix Lee SOVEREIGNTY OVER, OWNERSHIP OF, AND ACCESS TO NATURAL RESOURCES Leo-Felix Lee Former Assistant, German Advisory Council on Global Change, Germany Keywords: absolute territorial sovereignty and integrity, Harmon Doctrine, community of property, relative territorial sovereignty and integrity, physical interdependency of territories, trail smelter arbitration, Lac Lanoux Arbitration, equitable and reasonable utilization, no significant harm rule, rising utilization pressure and scientific knowledge, social interdependency of states, conservation part of long-term utilization strategy, multilateral agreements and global environmental goods, res communis omnium, common heritage of mankind, common but differentiated responsibilities, substantial standards and proceduralization, public ownership of natural resources, private investment security, public law constraints on private ownership, regulatory command and control approach, enforcement deficits, incentives for private actors, efficient allocation and effective utilization, transaction costs, clearly defined property rights, normative setting of overall emission quantities. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Sovereignty Over Natural Resources 2.1. Absolute Territorial Sovereignty and Integrity 2.2. Community of Property 2.3. Relative Territorial Sovereignty and Integrity 2.4. Present Trends 2.4.1. Collision of Relative Sovereignty and Integrity in the Light of Rising Utilizaiton
    [Show full text]
  • Planning the Peace and Enforcing the Surrender: Deterrence in the Allied Occupations of Germany
    Journal of Interdisciplinary History, xl:1 (Summer, 2009), 33–56. PLANNING THE PEACE Melissa Willard-Foster Planning the Peace and Enforcing the Surrender: Deterrence in the Allied Occupations of Germany and Japan “A well behaved occupied country,” writes Schelling in Arms and Inºuence, “is not one in which violence plays no part; it may be one in which latent violence is used so skillfully that it need not be spent in punishment.” If violence does not en- sue after a war, Schelling explains, it is because in the course of surrender negotiations, “the capacity to inºict pain and damage was successfully used in the bargaining process.” Schelling cites examples of Genghis Khan marching hostages ahead of his troops to deter resistance, the ancient Persians burning neighboring vil- lages of clans that they sought to control, and the British conduct- ing air raids in an attempt to pacify rebellious Arabian tribes. Bombings, hostage takings, publicized executions, forced evacua- tions, and compulsory labor are just a few among the many deter- rent strategies that occupiers have used for centuries to prevent re- sistance and keep defeated populations quiescent.1 Much in contrast to this traditional notion of ruthless con- quest is the conventional wisdom surrounding the reasons for suc- cess in the post-World War II (wwii) occupations of Germany and Japan. The perception that these occupations were largely peaceful enterprises, with respect to both the policies used and the re- sponses attained, supported early arguments from the administra- tion of President George W. Bush that similar results could obtain in Iraq.
    [Show full text]
  • International Law: Reservations to Multilateral Agreements
    DePaul Law Review Volume 5 Issue 1 Fall-Winter 1955 Article 4 International Law: Reservations to Multilateral Agreements Marcellus R. Meek Follow this and additional works at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review Recommended Citation Marcellus R. Meek, International Law: Reservations to Multilateral Agreements, 5 DePaul L. Rev. 40 (1955) Available at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review/vol5/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Law at Via Sapientiae. It has been accepted for inclusion in DePaul Law Review by an authorized editor of Via Sapientiae. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INTERNATIONAL LAW: RESERVATIONS TO MULTILATERAL AGREEMENTS MARCELLUS R. MEEK NE of the means by which States as subjects of international law acquire rights from, and undertake obligations toward, other subjects of international law is the formal conclusion of treaties.' A treaty is a source of international law, and, as such, governs to a substantial degree the relations existing between the inde- pendent States of the world. Although treaties have from time to time2 been referred to as con- tracts or compacts between States, it was early agreed that interna- tional transactions, whatever their descriptive designation, were of a higher order and distinguishable in principle from private contracts., But, it has been said, in solving the problems to which the practice of attaching reservations to the signature or ratification of treaties gives rise, the analogy between international treaties and the contracts of 4 private law has been found useful. In an effort to make this statement more readily comprehensible, it might be well at this point to digress for a moment to consider by way of preliminary examination what is meant by the term "reservation." The authorities are not in accord, but, in recent times, the most wide- 1 Schwarzenberger, A Manual of International Law 62 (3d ed., 1952).
    [Show full text]
  • Military Government Officials, US Policy, and the Occupation of Bavaria, 1945-1949
    Coping with Crisis: Military Government Officials, U.S. Policy, and the Occupation of Bavaria, 1945-1949 By Copyright 2017 John D. Hess M.A., University of Kansas, 2013 B.S., Oklahoma State University, 2011 Submitted to the graduate degree program in the Department of History and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Chair: Adrian R. Lewis Theodore A. Wilson Sheyda Jahanbani Erik R. Scott Mariya Omelicheva Date Defended: 28 April 2017 The dissertation committee for John D. Hess certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Coping with Crisis: Military Government Officials, U.S. Policy, and the Occupation of Bavaria, 1945-1949 Chair: Adrian R. Lewis Date Approved: 28 April 2017 ii Abstract This dissertation explores the implementation of American policy in postwar Germany from the perspective of military government officers and other occupation officials in the Land of Bavaria. It addresses three main questions: How did American military government officials, as part of the institution of the Office of Military Government, Bavaria (OMGB), respond to the challenges of the occupation? How did these individuals interact with American policy towards defeated Germany? And, finally, how did the challenges of postwar Germany shape that relationship with American policy? To answer these questions, this project focuses on the actions of military government officers and officials within OMGB from 1945 through 1949. Operating from this perspective, this dissertation argues that American officials in Bavaria possessed a complicated, often contradictory, relationship with official policy towards postwar Germany.
    [Show full text]