DOCSLIB.ORG

The United States and the Denial of Prisoner of War (POW) Status at the End of the Second World War1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The United States and the Denial of Prisoner of War (POW) Status at the End of the Second World War1 Aufsatz Richard D. Wiggers The United States and the Denial of Prisoner of War (POW) Status at the End of the Second World War1 In his study entitled Nazi Prisoners of War in America, historian Arnold Krammer relates how the U. S. Government followed the 1929 Geneva Convention to the letter during World War Π in its treatment of nearly 400,000 captured German military personnel imprisoned in POW camps across the United States. According to Krammer the U. S. government »was almost obsessed with adherence to a liberal interpretation of the Geneva Convention, often far in excess of any agreed-upon requirements«.2 Even during the closing months of the war, the United States government gave every indication that it intended to continue to abide fully by the 1929 Geneva Convention in its treatment of captured enemy military personnel. As of January 1945,100 million leaflets to that effect had been dropped behind the shrinking German front lines, and by April 1945 large numbers of »safe conduct« passes making similar promises and signed by Supreme Headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF) commander Dwight D. Eisenhower had also been dropped behind German lines by the US Army to induce surrenders of enemy military personnel.3 The same apparently unequivocal stance in support of compliance with the 1929 Geneva Convention was taken domestically by US government officials. During hearings which were held in Washington in April 1945 before a Special Committee of the US House of Representatives, officials from both the State and the War Departments testified that unless Congress decided otherwise, the 1929 Geneva Convention and strict adherence to its pro- visions remained the »law of the land« and would not be contravened by the United States.4 The following month the Theater Provost Marshal of the US Army, one of the officials most directly responsible for the custody and treatment of captured enemy military personnel, wrote an article in The American Mercury in which he assured the American public that »Today we of America are leading the world in our record of abiding by inter- national law. Certainly if we hope to make lawbreaking unpopular, we must ourselves appear in the court of world opinion with clean hands. If we aren't going to abide by 1 The author wishes to express his deep gratitude to his mentor and friend Professor Brian Villa. Without Brian's advice and assistance this article would never have been conceived or written. The author would also like to express his thanks to Professors Robert Keyserlingk and Günter Bischof for their guidance and encouragement in this project. — Portions of this article were original- ly presented on 20 June 1992 at the Eighteenth Annual Conference of the Society of Historians of American Foreign Relations in Hyde Park, New York. 2 London: 1991, p. 153. 3 BG Robert A. McClure, Psychological Warfare Division, SHAEF to the Chief of Staff, National Archives, Washington (NA), Record Group (RG) 59, General Records of the Department of State, Decimal File 1945-49, Box 3861, Document 740.00119 EW/2—1245, Colonel W.C. Chanler to Philip Jessup, 01 February 1945, FDR Library, Hyde Park, Fahy Papers, Box 65, File »Legal Consequences of Unconditional Surrender«, and Report of Proceedings and hearings held before the Special Committee of the Committee on Military Affairs, »Treatment of Prisoners of War«, 30 April 1945, NA, RG 59, Decimal File 1945-49, Box 3553, Document 740.00114 EW/4-3045, pp. 519-520. 4 Report of Proceedings, »Treatment of Prisoners of War« (see fn. 3), pp. 512—516 and 565—579. Militärgeschichtliche Mitteilungen 52(1993), S. 91—104 © Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt, Freiburg i.Br. 92 MGM 52 (1993) Richard D. Wiggers international laws, why deceive ourselves by having them [...] We believe that abiding by the Geneva Convention is the best thing for us now, as well as in the future.«5 Challenged by Canadian author James Bacque's 1989 book Other Losses: An Investiga- tion Into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners at the Hands of the French and Americans After World War II,6 as well as its later American and German editions, academics have now returned to the question of post-World War II Allied treatment of captured German military personnel. In Other Losses Bacque accused the Allies, and U. S. officials in par- ticular, of ruthlessly planning to violate the 1929 Geneva Convention in order to carry out a massive and illegal programme of long-term postwar employment of large numbers of German soldiers, and the death by starvation of a million of them. Originally designated POWs before the end of the war, Bacque claims that these and other enemy troops cap- tured after war's end were secretly switched to a new category not covered by the Geneva Convention, namely that of Disarmed Enemy Forces or Disarmed Enemy Force (DEF)s.7 In Bacque's view, it was SHAEF commander Dwight D. Eisenhower who personally devis- ed, drafted and signed the March 1945 order which »created the lethal DEF status« for captured German military personnel.8 This change of status supposedly allowed the Allies to ignore the stipulations of international law and to deal with the millions of German soldiers in their custody as they saw fit, including engineering their mistreatment and mass killing. The fact that several thousand captured enemy personnel, both POWs'and DEFs, died in Allied camps after the war from malnutrition and exposure has not been a secret, but certainly not one million died in the camps, and certainly not as the result of a concerted Allied or SHAEF plan. These points are discussed in more detail in a recently published collection of articles entitled Eisenhower and the German POWs: Facts Against Falsehood,9 This paper, meanwhile, will focus on an analysis of the denial of POW status, and the transfers from POW to DEF categories. It will attempt to show that indeed the Allies at the end of the war, like the Germans in some cases during the war, did withdraw cap- tured enemy personnel from the protection of the 1929 Geneva Convention, and will in- dicate reasons that this was done. It will also conclude that no satisfactory evidence exists at this time to link this change of status to any plan for a programme of mass killing as alleged by Bacque. The question of the status of captured German military personnel is indeed an impor- tant one. In order for a soldier to benefit from the protection of the rules of international humanitarian law, he must first be recognized as a »lawful belligerent« and be granted the status of a Prisoner of War upon capture. Only by gaining and maintaining POW status can an individual combatant claim Geneva Convention protection while in the custody of the enemy. In fact, it can be argued that the 1907 Hague Rules of Land Warfare and the 1929 Geneva Convention were a victory for international humanitarian law less because of the specific contents of the articles regarding the conditions to be provided 5 Major General Archer L. Lerch, »The Army Reports on Prisoners of War«, The American Mer- cury, May 1945, p. 3. 6 Toronto: 1989. 7 There are numerous other variations of this term which appear in war-time and post-war documents, but which have essentially the same meaning. Among the most common are »Surrendered Enemy Personnel«, »capitulated troops«, and »disarmed Germans«. 8 Bacque, Other Losses, (see fn. 6), pp. xii, 30, 164. 9 Günter Bischof and Stephen E. Ambrose (eds), Baton Rouge and London: 1992. The United States and the Denial of Prisoner of War 93 for captive military personnel than for the recognition of the POW status at all. These laws acknowledged that once disarmed and taken into custody a soldier of an enemy state was at the mercy of the detaining state which captured him, and deserved henceforth the protection of an international regime of regulations and standards.10 The detainee had in effect now become a third party to the conflict, protected as a matter of international public interest by the terms of the Convention until the conclusion of a peace treaty, or his repatriation to and/or the annexation of his state of origin. Unfortunately, the denial of POW status and Geneva Convention standards of treat- ment to captured enemy military personnel was hardly a novel occurence during World War II. The Germans did not accord them to millions of Red Army personnel which it captured during the course of the conflict on the eastern front, leading to fatal results for the majority.11 After the German annexation of Poland that country's military personnel were transferred to civilian labour status, and only Polish military officers continued to be accorded POW status.12 Yugoslavian military personnel were also denied POW status and were treated as civilian labourers. German officials argued in both the Polish and Yugoslav cases that the state of origin of these troops had ceased to exist and that Germany was now exercising sovereignty.13 During 1943 the Germans also decided to designate more than 500,000 Italian soldiers disarmed after that state's capitulation to the Allies as »military internees« rather than as POWs, arguing that the latter were not enemy personnel but subjects of the neo-Fascist government to which the Germans remained allied.14 In all of these cases the German authorities unilaterally denied or removed POW status and Geneva Convention guarantees of treatment and protection from captured enemy military personnel by employing various legalistic rationales. The denial of POW status by the Germans in turn led to abuses; poor diet, labour and living conditions, and even deaths on a massive scale.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Texas POW Camp Hearne, Texas
    Episode 2, 2005: Texas POW Camp Hearne, Texas Gwen: Our final story explores a forgotten piece of World War II history that unfolds on a mysterious plot of land deep in the heart of Texas. It’s summer, 1942, and Hitler’s armies are experiencing some of their first defeats, in North Africa. War offi- cials in Great Britain are in crisis. They have no more space to house the steadily mounting numbers of captured German soldiers. Finally, in August, America opened its borders to an emergency batch of prison- ers, marking the beginning of a little-known chapter in American history, when thousands of German soldiers marched into small town, U.S.A. More than 60 years later, that chapter is about to be reopened by a woman named Lisa Trampota, who believes the U.S. government planted a German prisoner of war camp right on her family land in Texas. Lisa Trampota: By the time I really got interested and wanted to learn more, everyone had died that knew anything about it. I’d love to learn more about my family’s history and how I’m connected with that property. Gwen: I’m Gwen Wright. I’ve come to Hearne, Texas, to find some answers to Lisa’s questions. Hi, Lisa? Lisa: Hi. Gwen: I’m Gwen. Lisa: Hi, Gwen, it’s very nice to meet you. Gwen: So, I got your phone call. Now tell me exactly what you’d like for me to find out for you. Lisa: Well, I heard, through family legend, that we owned some property outside of Hearne, and that in the 1940s the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Remedies for Victims of Violations of International Humanitarian Law
    RICR Septembre IRRC September 2003 Vol. 85 No 851 497 Remedies for victims of violations of international humanitarian law LIESBETH ZEGVELD* International humanitarian law (“IHL”) has never been confined to the level of relations between States.1 On the contrary, the initiators of the nineteenth century conventions already believed that human persons had inviolable rights even during armed conflicts.2 However, recognition of rights is one thing, the right to claim those rights is another. So far, States have been reluctant to entitle, explicitly and in general, victims of violations of international humanitarian law to claim reparation. As humanitarian law treaties do not expressly envisage causes of action for victims in national or international law, they are hardly able to exercise their rights. On this point international humanitarian law sharply contrasts with tendencies in international law. In spite of the gap in the International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility, which were finally adopted in 20013 but fail to mention rights of individuals in the regime of secondary rights,4 it is generally known that human rights treaties provide a remedy, both substantive and procedural, for individuals suffering injury from unlaw- ful conduct by State authorities. For example, Article 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights stipulates that individuals whose rights as set forth in that Convention are violated shall have “an effective remedy before a national authority”. And Article 50 of the same Convention mandates the European Court of Human Rights to afford just satisfaction to victims. Human rights treaties also provide for specific provisions on compensation, for example to victims of unlawful arrest or detention.5 Most recently, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court6 authorizes the Court to determine any damage, loss or injury to victims and order reparations to them.
    [Show full text]
  • The Enemy in Colorado: German Prisoners of War, 1943-46
    The Enemy in Colorado: German Prisoners of War, 1943-46 BY ALLEN W. PASCHAL On 7 December 1941 , the day that would "live in infamy," the United States became directly involved in World War II. Many events and deeds, heroic or not, have been preserved as historic reminders of that presence in the world conflict. The imprisonment of American sol­ diers captured in combat was a postwar curiosity to many Americans. Their survival, living conditions, and treatment by the Germans became major considerations in intensive and highly publicized investigations. However, the issue of German prisoners of war (POWs) interned within the United States has been consistently overlooked. The internment centers for the POWs were located throughout the United States, with different criteria determining the locations of the camps. The first camps were extensions of large military bases where security was more easily accomplished. When the German prisoners proved to be more docile than originally believed, the camps were moved to new locations . The need for laborers most specifically dic­ tated the locations of the camps. The manpower that was available for needs other than the armed forces and the war industries was insuffi­ cient, and Colorado, in particular, had a large agricultural industry that desperately needed workers. German prisoners filled this void. There were forty-eight POW camps in Colorado between 1943 and 1946.1 Three of these were major base camps, capable of handling large numbers of prisoners. The remaining forty-five were agricultural or other work-related camps . The major base camps in Colorado were at Colorado Springs, Trinidad, and Greeley.
    [Show full text]
  • German Prisoners of War in Canada, 1940–1946: an Autobiography-Based Essay
    Canadian Military History Volume 27 Issue 2 Article 19 2018 German Prisoners of War in Canada, 1940–1946: An Autobiography-Based Essay Franz-Karl Stanzel Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh Part of the Military History Commons Recommended Citation Stanzel, Franz-Karl "German Prisoners of War in Canada, 1940–1946: An Autobiography-Based Essay." Canadian Military History 27, 2 (2018) This Feature is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Canadian Military History by an authorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Stanzel: German Prisoners of War in Canada German Prisoners of War in Canada, 1940–1946 An Autobiography-Based Essay FRANZ-KARL STANZEL “What is a prisoner of war? He is a man who has tried to kill you and, having failed to kill you, asks you not to kill him.” —Winston Churchill Abstract : The four years I spent in British and Canadian POW Camps offered ample time to study English Literature. This experience in particular had a decisive effect on my later career as university teacher of English literature. It also helped me to become one of the first Anglicists at German and Austrian universities, who included Canadian literature in his syllabus and a founder member of the German Association for Canadian Studies. In this essay based on my war-autobiography, I describe the experience of German POWs in Canada. I was captured in 1942 when serving as third officer of the watch on board U-331 after my vessel was sunk in the Mediterranean by a torpedo fired from a RAF Albacore.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of Prisoners of War in the Twentieth Century
    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works Student Theses Baruch College 1-1-1997 A study of prisoners of war in the twentieth century Victor Montejo Baruch College How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/bb_etds/45 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] A STUDY OF PRISONERS OF WAR IN THE TWENTHIETH CENTURY by Victor Montejo © April 28, 1997 Submitted to the Committee on Undergraduate Honors of Baruch College of The City University of New York in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts in History with Honors ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS INTRODUCTION Status of prisoners of war in the Middle Ages Philosophical and Humanitarian opinions Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Emmerich de Vattel Red Cross and Francis Lieber Geneva Convention, Hague Convention and the Red Cross First World War Industrialization and modern warfare The European Front Russian treatment of prisoners of war German treatment of prisoners of war British treatment of prisoners of war The Pacific Front Japanese treatment of prisoners of war The Middle East British treatment of prisoners of war The Interwar years League of Nations Geneva Convention of 1929 The Spanish Civil War Conflict of Idealism; Fascism, Communism, and Democracy Second World War The Pacific Front Japanese treatment of prisoners of war Allied treatment of prisoners
    [Show full text]
  • 'Hospitality Is the Best Form of Propaganda': German Prisoners Of
    The Historical Journal of Massachusetts “Hospitality Is the Best Form of Propaganda”: German Prisoners of War in Western Massachusetts, 1944-1946.” Author: John C. Bonafilia Source: Historical Journal of Massachusetts, Volume 44, No. 1, Winter 2016, pp. 44-83. Published by: Institute for Massachusetts Studies and Westfield State University You may use content in this archive for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the Historical Journal of Massachusetts regarding any further use of this work: [email protected] Funding for digitization of issues was provided through a generous grant from MassHumanities. Some digitized versions of the articles have been reformatted from their original, published appearance. When citing, please give the original print source (volume/number/date) but add "retrieved from HJM's online archive at http://www.westfield.ma.edu/historical-journal/. 44 Historical Journal of Massachusetts • Winter 2016 German POWs Arrive in Western Massachusetts Captured German troops enter Camp Westover Field in Chicopee Falls, Massachusetts. Many of the prisoners would go on to work as farmhands contracted out to farms in the Pioneer Valley. Undated photo. Courtesy of Air Force Historical Research Agency, Maxwell Air Force Base. 45 “Hospitality Is the Best Form of Propaganda”: German Prisoners of War in Western Massachusetts, 1944–1946 JOHN C. BONAFILIA Abstract: In October 1944, the first German prisoners of war (POWs) arrived at Camp Westover Field in Chicopee Falls, Massachusetts. Soon after, many of these prisoners were transported to farms throughout Hampshire, Franklin, and Hampden Counties to help local farmers with their harvest. The initial POW workforce numbered 250 Germans, but farmers quickly requested more to meet the demands of the community and to free up American soldiers for international service.
    [Show full text]
  • Japanese Prisoners of War in America Author(S): Arnold Krammer Reviewed Work(S): Source: Pacific Historical Review, Vol
    Japanese Prisoners of War in America Author(s): Arnold Krammer Reviewed work(s): Source: Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 52, No. 1 (Feb., 1983), pp. 67-91 Published by: University of California Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3639455 . Accessed: 13/01/2012 10:32 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Pacific Historical Review. http://www.jstor.org Japanese Prisoners of War in America Arnold Krammer The author is professor of history in Texas A r M University. F EWAMERICANS today recall that the nation maintained 425,000 enemyduring the SecondWorld War in prisoner-of-warcamps from New Yorkto California.The majorityof these captiveswere Ger- mans, followedby Italians and Japanese.The incarcerationof the 5,424 Japanesesoldiers and sailorsin the United States,'most cap- tured involuntarilyduring the bloody battles of the South Pacific, testedthe formidableingenuity of the WarDepartment. The veryfirst prisonerof war capturedby Americanforces was Japanese.Ensign Kazuo Sakamaki,the
    [Show full text]
  • Coddling, Fraternization, and Total War in Camp Crossville, Tennessee
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 5-2004 Making the Most of a Bad Situation: Coddling, Fraternization, and Total War in Camp Crossville, Tennessee Gregory J. Kupsky University of Tennessee, Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Kupsky, Gregory J., "Making the Most of a Bad Situation: Coddling, Fraternization, and Total War in Camp Crossville, Tennessee. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2004. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/4636 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Gregory J. Kupsky entitled "Making the Most of a Bad Situation: Coddling, Fraternization, and Total War in Camp Crossville, Tennessee." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Arts, with a major in History. G. Kurt Piehler, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: George White, Vejas Liulevicius Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Gregory J.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Studies Journal
    University of Colorado Denver Colorado University of Historic Preservation in Britain and the United States: Examining How We Save the Links to Our Pasts StudiesHistorical Journal The Stable of the Iron Horse Historical A Harbor Commodious: How the Massachusetts Bay Company Developed the New England Fishing Trade During the Seventeenth Century Studies Knowing the Enemy: The Influence of Identity on the Treatment of Spring 2016 Spring German POWS in Colorado Journal During World War II Spring 2016 Volume 33 . Western Mythology: . The Literary World of 33 Volume Railroad Survey Camps in the 1880s Medical Regulation Mayhem: The Struggle over Medical Professionalization in 19th Century Colorado Historical Studies Journal Spring 2016 . Volume 33 SENIOR EDITOR: Kirby Page-Schmit, Graduate Student ASSISTANT EDITORS: Glendon Butterfield, Graduate Student Erica Fontenot, Graduate Student Laura Hogg, Graduate Student Thomas J. Noel, Faculty Advisor DESIGNER: Shannon Fluckey Integrated Marketing & Communications Auraria Higher Education Center Department of History University of Colorado Denver Pamela Laird, Ph.D., Thomas J. Noel, Ph.D. Department Chair American West, Art & Architecture, U.S. Social, Intellectual, Technology, Public History & Preservation, Colorado Public History, Business Kelly Palmer, Ph.D. Christopher Agee, Ph.D. Modern Europe and France 20th Century U.S., Urban History, Social Movements, Crime and Policing Stacey Pendleton, M.A. Cold War/US, Modern Britain Ryan Crewe, Ph.D. Latin America, Colonial Mexico, Carl Pletsch, Ph.D. Transpacific History Intellectual History (European and American), Modern Europe James E. Fell, Jr., Ph.D. American West, Civil War, Myra Rich, Ph.D., Emeritus Environmental, Film History U.S. Colonial, U.S. Early National, Women and Gender, Immigration Gabriel Finkelstein, Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • RYAN N. ABT Department of History 4236 TAMU Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843 [email protected] EDUCATION Texas
    RYAN N. ABT Department of History 4236 TAMU Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843 [email protected] EDUCATION Texas A&M University, College Station, TX (2016-Present) Doctor of Philosophy in History, expected 2020 PhD Candidate University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX Master of Arts in History (2015) Thesis Committee: Thomas Adam (Chair), Steven Reinhardt, and Andrew Milson “Representations of the Holocaust in Texas World History Textbooks from 1947 to 1990” East Texas Baptist University, Marshall, TX Bachelor of Science in Education: Social Studies (2005) SCHOLARLY ACTIVITY Publications in Refereed Journals: “‘No Propaganda Story’: The Prehistory of American Holocaust Consciousness in Textbooks, 1940-1962.” Yearbook of Transnational History. Accepted and scheduled for publication as YTH 2:1 (Summer 2019). Conference Presentations: “In a Democracy and in a Dictatorship”: Representing the Murder of Europe’s Jews in New York City Public Education 1945-1965,” 2019 Annual Meeting of the Society for the Study of Curriculum History, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, April 4-5, 2019. “Saving the World: Employing Holocaust Rhetoric in America’s Post-Cold War Foreign Policy,” 2018 Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, June 21-23, 2018. “Looking Back and Looking Forward on the Santa Fe Trail: A History of Cleburne High Schools,” 2017 Annual Organization of Education Historians Conference, Northpark University, Chicago, Illinois, October 6-7, 2017. “Teaching Holocaust Memory: American Holocaust Consciousness in Textbooks,” 2017 Annual Missouri Valley History Conference, the University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, Nebraska, March 2-4, 2017. “The Truth Could Not Be Denied: Representations of the American Response to the Holocaust in Texas American History Textbooks,” MTSU International Conference in Holocaust Studies, Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, October 15-18, 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • German Prisoners of War in Britain, 1940-1948: Policy and Performance
    _________________________________________________________________________Swansea University E-Theses German prisoners of war in Britain, 1940-1948: Policy and performance. Clarke, Gillian S How to cite: _________________________________________________________________________ Clarke, Gillian S (2006) German prisoners of war in Britain, 1940-1948: Policy and performance.. thesis, Swansea University. http://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa42278 Use policy: _________________________________________________________________________ This item is brought to you by Swansea University. Any person downloading material is agreeing to abide by the terms of the repository licence: copies of full text items may be used or reproduced in any format or medium, without prior permission for personal research or study, educational or non-commercial purposes only. The copyright for any work remains with the original author unless otherwise specified. The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holder. Permission for multiple reproductions should be obtained from the original author. Authors are personally responsible for adhering to copyright and publisher restrictions when uploading content to the repository. Please link to the metadata record in the Swansea University repository, Cronfa (link given in the citation reference above.) http://www.swansea.ac.uk/library/researchsupport/ris-support/ German Prisoners of War in Britain, 1940-1948: Policy and Performance Gillian S. Clarke Submitted to the University of Wales in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Swansea University, 2006 ProQuest Number: 10797986 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 com plete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted.
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Prisoner of War Camps Lesson Plan
    1 Prisoner of War Camps in Texas Purpose This lesson is intended to be a quick, easy way for you to fit in important World War II TEKS that can be difficult to get to incorporate into 7th grade Texas History. It is a stand-alone lesson that could be used close to Veterans’ Day or Memorial Day or fit in with a unit on World War II. (It might also prove useful in 8th grade with the Language Arts unit on The Diary of Anne Frank.) The evaluation is very simple and short, but provides a way for you to check student understanding. Extra resources are provided for the teacher to give background information and to use as enrichment with students if time allows. Approximate Timeframe One day TEKS 7.7(E) analyze the political, economic, and social impact of major events, including World War I, the Great Depression and World War II, on the history of Texas 7.8(A) create thematic maps, graphs, charts, models, and databases representing various aspects of Texas during the 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries 7.8(B) analyze and interpret geographic distributions and patterns in Texas during the 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries Key Understandings Students will understand how prisoner of war (POW) camps and POW labor helped the Texas economy. Students will understand why POW camps were located in certain geographic regions of Texas. Guiding Questions Why did so many communities in Texas want POW camps located in them? What kind of work did POWs do in Texas? Did POW camps have a lasting effect on Texas? Why is it important for people to know about POW camps in Texas? Vocabulary Prisoner of War Texas Historical Commission P.O.
    [Show full text]