Christian Dirks. "Die Verbrechen der anderen": Auschwitz und der Auschwitz-Prozess der DDR. Das Verfahren gegen den KZ-Arzt Dr. Horst Fischer. Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöningh Verlag, 2005. 408 pp. EUR 42.90, cloth, ISBN 978-3-506-71363-6.
Harald Schmid. Antifaschismus und Judenverfolgung: Die "Reichskristallnacht" als politischer Gedenktag in der DDR. Hannah- Arendt-Institut für Totalitarismusforschung Berichte und Studien. Göttingen: V&R unipress, 2004. 153 pp. EUR 16.80, paper, ISBN 978-3-89971-146-2.
Jan Philipp Spannuth. Rückerstattung Ost: Der Umgang der DDR mit dem "arisierten" und enteigneten Eigentum der Juden und die Gestaltung der Rückerstattung im wiedervereinigten Deutschland. Essen: Klartext Verlag, 2007. 255 pp. EUR 27.90, paper, ISBN 978-3-89861-656-0.
Reviewed by Andrew Beattie
Published on H-German (May, 2009)
Commissioned by Susan R. Boettcher
In the decade after 1989, the German Demo‐ handling of the National Socialist past.[1] Def‐ cratic Republic's (self-)image as the "better Ger‐ ciencies and blind spots in its treatment of victims many"--the negation of fascist Germany and the of the Holocaust were exposed, as was its prag‐ embodiment of the antifascist resistance--was vig‐ matic integration of former Nazis. A new consen‐ orously contested. Scholars, politicians, intellectu‐ sus held that, in contrast with its self-depiction, als, and publicists critically scrutinized the GDR's the GDR was by no means "better" than the Feder‐ H-Net Reviews al Republic of Germany, which it had mercilessly gest ambiguous and complex answers to these attacked as the barely tamed continuation of fas‐ questions. cist interests. Instead, the many shortcomings of The ostensible focus of Christian Dirks's well- West Germany's eforts to "come to terms" with written work is an examination of the East Ger‐ the Nazi past now appeared as unfortunate man counterpart to the famous and much-studied bumps on the road to an honest, self-critical ap‐ Frankfurt am Main "Auschwitz trial" of 1963-65. proach to German responsibility for Nazi geno‐ [4] Dirks treats the "GDR's Auschwitz trial" not cide, while the GDR's mendacious antifascism, only as a component of East German judicial his‐ having amounted to little more than an instru‐ tory, but also as an aspect of East Germany's and ment for regime legitimation, met its deserved West Germany's Beziehungsgeschichte. Yet these end in 1989-90.[2] are not Dirks's only aims. He also seeks to contrib‐ By the turn of the millennium at the latest, re‐ ute to research into Nazi perpetrators by examin‐ searchers interested in more complex accounts ing the roles of SS doctors at Auschwitz, in partic‐ identifed defciencies in the prevailing under‐ ular that of the trial's defendant Horst Fischer, standing. These included its primary focus on the who served there from late 1942 and from 1943 as 1940s and 1950s, its overwhelming focus on the deputy chief SS doctor. Accordingly, the actual tri‐ communist regime, and its treatment of the GDR al is addressed only in the fnal of three sections, in isolation from (or at best in isolated compari‐ which, although it spans about 140 pages, almost son with) the Federal Republic.[3] Numerous seems brief after nearly 200 pages of what might questions remained: to what extent did the otherwise constitute background information, regime control and manipulate eforts to address were it not for Dirks's ambitions with regard to (or ignore) the past? Were such eforts merely "in‐ perpetrator research. strumentalized" for political ends, or was there a The frst section provides an overview of genuine interest in facing up to (aspects of) prosecutions of Nazi criminals by Soviet tribunals Nazism and if so, where? Is it possible to speak of and East German courts between 1945 and 1955. East German antifascisms beyond the ofcial doc‐ It also discusses East Germany's propaganda cam‐ trine (which might conceivably have persisted af‐ paigns against the Federal Republic in the 1950s ter 1989)? To what extent did change occur over and 1960s over its unmastered Nazi past and the the decades? And what was the nature of the in‐ compromised pasts of its elites. Drawing on exten‐ teraction of the two Germanys in this area--their sive secondary literature, this section, like the Beziehungsgeschichte? A further question that is whole book, is systematic and thorough. At times worth posing at the end of the second decade af‐ it seems excessively so, although some points that ter 1989 concerns the possibility of moving be‐ initially seem superfuous (such as somewhat con‐ yond the predominantly judgmental post-Wende fused references to Soviet internment camps) do discourse to write the history of East German han‐ fall into place eventually. Dirks might have taken dling of the Nazi past, indeed the history of post‐ a little more care with his use of contested terms war Germany in general, without the highly nor‐ such as "collective guilt" (p. 35), but he convinc‐ mative and evaluative approach that dominated ingly draws out the early and enduring "instru‐ the scholarship of the 1990s. In addressing di‐ mentalization of prosecutions of Nazi crimes for verse dimensions of East Germany's handling of the political-propagandistic goals of the rulers" in the legacies of Nazi persecution and genocide of the Soviet Occupied Zone (SBZ) (p. 37), including the Jews, the three books under discussion sug‐ their timing in conjunction with trials of similar crimes in the western zones, the absence of sys‐
2 H-Net Reviews tematic prosecutions, and a preference for a small "selections" on the ramp at Birkenau and in the number of highly publicized trials. The discussion hospital at the Monowitz satellite camp run by the also suggests, more implicitly, the relative absence SS for IG Farben; conducting experiments on pa‐ of prosecutions of crimes directly associated with tients; supervising mass murder in the gas cham‐ the Holocaust. In discussing the SED's propaganda bers; and overseeing the death march following campaigns against the Federal Republic, Dirks the camp's evacuation. This section ofers valu‐ stresses the basic accuracy of many of East able insights into the power struggles both within Berlin's charges against Bonn, due to the fact that the SS and between the SS and IG Farben at the denazifed old "elites in the state, the econo‐ Auschwitz, as well as into the selection processes my, the academy, and the military were almost from the perspective of an SS doctor. Dirks also completely reinstated" in the 1950s (p. 55), in con‐ discusses Auschwitz's SS doctors' social and fami‐ trast to which the GDR claimed to have expunged ly life. While Fischer was clearly not one of the fascism, root and branch. most brutal SS doctors or ofcers, he made no se‐ Yet, as Dirks argues in his conclusion, "the rious attempt to be transferred away from only thing systematic about the criminal prosecu‐ Auschwitz. Dirks's attribution to him of "a pro‐ tion of Nazi crimes in the GDR was the consistent nounced sense of injustice" while there (p. 186) oversight of its own defcits in this area" (p. 330). comes somewhat as a surprise, partly because we As is well known, many former Nazis integrated never really get inside Fischer's head, despite his themselves into East German society, with or extensive subsequent testimony. Dirks's plausible without undergoing denazifcation. Fischer fnal assessment is that Fischer was "no small cog (1912-66) is an example. Dirks's second section ad‐ within the National Socialist machinery of exter‐ dresses Fischer's path from petit bourgeois origins mination, of which he became a part through a fa‐ and early orphanhood in Dresden, via a medical tal mix of antisemitism, indiference, careerism, degree at Berlin University and membership in and enrichment" (p. 168). the SS since late 1933, to Auschwitz. It also Although several of his colleagues had faced presents his avoidance of detection at war's end trial, by the late 1940s Fischer believed he had and his 1946 move to Spreenhagen in provincial evaded responsibility for his actions. Dirks stress‐ Brandenburg, where he practiced as the local es that such optimism was not unjustifed, be‐ physician until his arrest in 1965. This section is cause Fischer's whereabouts were unknown to perhaps the book's strongest; it provides a grip‐ the authorities outside the GDR that were investi‐ ping account of one individual's path to becoming gating him. Indeed, only Fischer's negative atti‐ a professional killer, as well as a detailed exami‐ tude toward the GDR and frequent visits to West nation of doctors' roles within the SS machinery Berlin attracted the attention of the district Stasi of exploitation and extermination. That Dirks's ac‐ ofce in the early 1960s. In 1965, he was identifed count is so rich is due not least to extensive state‐ as the SS doctor about whom Stasi headquarters ments Fischer made in custody, Dirks's examina‐ had, coincidentally, only recently registered in‐ tion of which--combined with his utilization of ex‐ criminating material. His arrest was announced isting literature, including that produced by pris‐ after a delay of several months, just as the second oner-functionaries such as Hermann Langbein, Frankfurt Auschwitz trial began. Such timing re‐ who worked alongside Fischer--constitutes a sig‐ fected East Berlin's desire to gain infuence over nifcant contribution to the literature. Fischer's and pursue a counter-trial to the proceedings in various activities and responsibilities at Frankfurt. After plans to transform the frst Auschwitz included combating typhus epidemics Frankfurt trial into a "tribunal against IG Farben" (among SS personnel and prisoners); undertaking and its successor companies failed (p. 224), Fisch‐
3 H-Net Reviews er's arrest ofered the East German authorities a responses of the local Spreenhagen population, of welcome opportunity to highlight the company's discussions of the trial within various East Ger‐ role at Monowitz and more broadly in the devel‐ man institutions, and of Fischer's own remark‐ opment of Nazi policies of exploitation and exter‐ ably contrite letters to his wife after his sentenc‐ mination. In the context of West German and in‐ ing. Some of these subsections are rather descrip‐ ternational debates about statutes of limitations tive, with chunks of reported speech, but they for Nazi crimes, the GDR also sought to position it‐ help to support Dirks's insistence that eforts to self as the only German state that was pursuing a understand such trials must go beyond analyzing rigorous course of justice against those responsi‐ judgments and demonstrate the value of in-depth ble. Dirks highlights the Stasi's extensive planning examinations of individual trials. for the trial, including instructions to the press Dirks's discussion of the trial's conformity to about appropriate interpretations, selection of au‐ the principles of the rule of law and its "show tri‐ dience members, the development of an accompa‐ al" character is less satisfying. On the one hand, nying exhibit, and the instruction to execute Fis‐ his assessment that the trial formally conformed cher. Dirks also discusses the role Fischer played to rule-of-law principles--despite the predeter‐ in the Frankfurt trials, including the signifcance mined verdict--is disconcerting. On the other of his admissions in securing a verdict in the sec‐ hand, his claim that it had all the hallmarks of a ond trial. This section testifes to the importance show trial is unsatisfying. Three points--raised not of Beziehungsgeschichte for understanding both least by Dirks's quotation of Stasi boss Erich East and West German developments. Mielke to the efect that Fischer had to be brought Dirks's discussion of Fischer's trial stresses to "feel required to give the world the opportunity that the indictment, expert witness testimony, and to see the crimes of the fascists in their entire bar‐ judgment were all directed against IG Farben as barity, heinousness, and hypocrisy" (p. 211)--war‐ much as against Fischer, who was held responsi‐ rant further consideration. First, Mielke's state‐ ble for the murder of seventy thousand people (al‐ ment and Dirks's reference to Fischer's "prepara‐ most one hundred a day, as the verdict observed). tion" by the Stasi (p. 333) suggest that Fischer's Dirks repeatedly notes that, propaganda aside, confession may have been extracted under their descriptions of the history of Auschwitz in duress, a point that does not otherwise feature in general and the role of IG Farben in particular Dirks's account. Second, as Andreas Hilger has ar‐ largely accord with current historiography. The gued, such trials were less "show trials" than prosecution and prominent East German witness‐ "demonstration trials," because the crimes (of Fis‐ es also sought to condemn the Federal Republic, cher and IG Farben) did not have to be invented. which was even blamed for the embarrassing fact [5] Finally, despite the undeniably dominant role that such a major criminal had lived undetected played by the regime's political aims, Mielke's in the GDR for two decades. Meanwhile, Fischer's statement suggests that Fischer's trial also served defense, led by Wolfgang Vogel, had a difcult a more legitimate desire to expose Nazi crimes, task in light of the overwhelming evidence and which, to be sure, was only acted upon when op‐ Fischer's extensive confession. The High Court of portune. Despite not fully addressing these points, Justice accepted the prosecution's case--with the Dirks's book is an important addition not only to exception of the charge that Fischer had ordered the literature on the GDR's handling of the Nazi the use of Zyklon B gas--and sentenced him to past and East-West German Beziehungsgeschichte death. Dirks gives brief accounts of East and West in this area, but also to the study of Auschwitz German press coverage of the verdict, of the and of doctors' roles in the Holocaust. mainly sympathetic and occasionally antisemitic
4 H-Net Reviews
In contrast with Dirks's substantial investiga‐ decades. Nevertheless, Jewish communities com‐ tion, Harald Schmid provides a single citation for memorated the pogrom, initially in league with, the actual history of Reichskristallnacht. Schmid's but soon as second fddle to the Association of the study is an expanded version of a part of his dis‐ Nazi Regime's Persecuted (VVN). Postwar anti‐ sertation on the pogrom's commemoration in the semitism and the prewar responsibility of by‐ Federal Republic.[6] With laudable brevity, he standers were openly discussed in 1947 and 1948, presents the changing contexts, actors, and inter‐ even if only exceptional fgures like Paul Merker pretations of the pogrom, from the KPD's immedi‐ placed antisemitism at the center of their under‐ ate sympathetic response in 1938--with which standing of fascism. Despite the Stalinization of Erich Honecker still sought to legitimize the GDR the SED and the development of Soviet bloc anti- in the 1980s--through a commemorative demon‐ Zionism, Schmid shows that, in contrast to previ‐ stration of New Forum supporters in Leipzig on ous claims, the pogrom continued to be commem‐ the night the Berlin Wall fell. With the exception orated by Jewish communities and the VVN be‐ of a single archival record, Schmid's sources are tween 1949 and 1953, but that depictions of Jews' contemporary publications, from Neues Deutsch‐ past persecution became increasingly "anony‐ land to Jewish community periodicals. Otherwise, mous" (p. 36), while contemporary anti-Zionism he draws on already considerable literature on and "anti-cosmopolitanism" led to the emigration the situation of Jews and the handling of the Holo‐ of a third of the GDR's small Jewish community. caust in the GDR, including some brief, older stud‐ By 1953, critical discussion of the roles of by‐ ies on his very topic. Schmid's study makes an ex‐ standers had disappeared, while newspaper cov‐ emplary efort at analyzing his subject within the erage paid more attention to West Germany's al‐ changing contexts of the East-West confict, the leged crypto-fascism than to the events of 1938. GDR's philosophy of history, its confrontation and Attacks on the West (for which the anniversary of‐ competition with the Federal Republic, its policy ten simply provided an occasion) increased in toward Israel, and the state of its Jewish commu‐ subsequent years, but the pogrom's twentieth an‐ nity. Indeed, Schmid synthesizes recent research niversary signaled to GDR authorities that they on antifascism, highlighting its functions for the were falling behind the Federal Republic, where regime but also acknowledging that it cannot be prominent state representatives participated in reduced to these. He strikes a similarly nuanced commemoration, in contrast with the low-level note on the GDR's handling of the Holocaust, argu‐ CDU representatives who participated in the GDR. ing that even if the latter was not taboo in the Only beginning in 1963 did the pogrom's an‐ GDR, the fact that no specifc sense of obligation niversary even begin to approach the signifcance towards its Jewish victims arose itself constituted of the GDR's major commemorative dates. More‐ "a damning indictment" of ofcial antifascism (p. over, its commemoration now assumed certain 17). characteristics that would remain largely intact After two introductory chapters, the study until 1988: frst and foremost, a pact between the proceeds chronologically. While the Nazis' Jewish regime and the leadership of the East German victims were included, but received no special Jewish communities to exchange ofcial attention place in, Soviet zone commemorations of the Day from the former for political subordination and of Remembrance for the Victims of Fascism, com‐ declarations of loyalty from the latter, but also the memoration on and around November 9 was de‐ increasing activism of the Protestant churches. An voted primarily to celebrating the 1917 Russian anomaly occurred in 1967 with a unique attempt and 1918 German revolutions, behind which the at joint commemoration of the 1918 revolution 1938 pogrom would remain secondary for and the 1938 pogrom. Otherwise, a degree of ritu‐
5 H-Net Reviews alization set in, as did a quantitative increase in events were explicitly church-run, heralding the commemorative events (to twenty-two events in emergence of a "commemorative dissidence" (p. ffteen East German cities in 1968 compared with 100). seventy-fve events in forty-four cities in the In part to maintain the impression of leader‐ West). Schmid stresses that unlike the diverse civil ship and control, eforts at state planning and ma‐ society initiatives and coalitions responsible in nipulation increased through to 1988, when more the West, most events in the East were organized than 140 commemorative events took place in by Jewish communities, with state representatives over sixty cities and towns, including a special sit‐ as invited guests. Moreover, they had an afrma‐ ting of the Volkskammer. Schmid concludes: "[a]ll tive rather than critical character, except where in all a massively forced commemoration without the Federal Republic was concerned. Difcult parallel" (p. 115). New features in the late 1980s questions about past or present antisemitism, were more dialogue and competition across the about bystanders or compensation, were absent. German-German border, and the regime's in‐ These characteristics persisted into the 1970s, creased interest in promoting its activities to the threatened primarily by the dwindling Jewish English-speaking world. Inevitably, increased of‐ population, which meant that only Berlin and cial attention to the victims of Nazi persecution Leipzig held ceremonies every year. The 1970s gave East German dissidents occasion to criticize saw the beginning of a Jewish-Christian rap‐ contemporary problems such as xenophobia and prochement, with representatives of the two reli‐ neo-Nazism as well as the regime's own repres‐ gions participating in each other's ceremonies, sive character. In 1989, state actors were preoccu‐ and Protestant leaders reviving discussion of the pied with trying to cling to power, so the few com‐ complicity of the churches and the general popu‐ memorative activities were church-led or inde‐ lation. pendent. The opening of the border on the As Schmid argues, "the wall preventing deep‐ evening of November 9 meant the end of com‐ ened understanding of the system of the 'Third memorating the 1938 pogrom in the GDR. Reich' stood throughout the entire existence of the Schmid's book provides a compact account of GDR, but increasing cracks emerged in the last that history, which he conceives as part of a wider decade and a half" (p. 78), a development he Beziehungsgeschichte with the Federal Republic views in parallel with the broader diferentiation over the legacy of the Nazi past. He rejects sim‐ of East German society and the SED's gradual loss plistic and deterministic interpretations, insisting, of control. He interprets 1978 as a twofold turning for example, that the infationary commemora‐ point in the anniversary's commemoration, when tion in 1988 not be seen merely as instrumental‐ a new record of forty-four events marked the ization. Like Dirks, Schmid acknowledges the cor‐ pogrom's fortieth anniversary. On the one hand, rect content of much SED propaganda against the for the frst time Neues Deutschland granted the West. He also notes the biological or personal le‐ pogrom an identity separate from and compara‐ gitimacy of many East German leaders' antifascist ble with, if still secondary to that of the 1918 revo‐ positions. Yet, a "specifcally East German" com‐ lution. Such prominence pointed to the careful memoration of Reichskristallnacht remains elu‐ planning by the state secretariat for churches, the sive (p. 133). Moreover, despite asking "what re‐ SED Central Committee and the Stasi, not least mains" (p. 135), Schmid does not look beyond with a view to direct competition with the West. 1989. These limitations can perhaps be attributed On the other hand, Schmid demonstrates that al‐ to his study's (undefned) focus on November 9 as ternative forms emerged, such as seminars and a "political" day of commemoration. Although he silent marches, organized by new actors: thirty
6 H-Net Reviews mentions the treatment of the Holocaust by indi‐ criminals," indeed all state property, was always vidual East German historians and in GDR litera‐ to be excluded. In early 1948 the SED Central Sec‐ ture in general, he does not seek to provide a retariat accepted a bill prepared by Merker and broader cultural history of the pogrom's reception Helmut Lehmann that granted restitution to vic‐ in the GDR. For instance, he refers to a 1968 com‐ tims residing in Germany whose property had not memorative event featuring prominent East Ger‐ been nationalized after 1945. Yet opposition--par‐ man authors, but instead of delving into their ap‐ ticularly from the Central Secretariat's legal de‐ proaches, he merely recounts how Neues Deutsch‐ partment--defeated not only the more radical de‐ land reported the event. Indeed, we learn little of mands of SBZ Jewish communities, but also this the content of alternative activities, which virtual‐ modest proposal. Spannuth argues that such op‐ ly disappear in Schmid's fnal analysis and com‐ position was due less to budgetary concerns and parison with the West: "In retrospect, commemo‐ the desire to integrate former Nazis than to anti- ration in the SED dictatorship, which was always capitalist ideology tinged with antisemitism. He functionalized and directed by the state and al‐ suggests, plausibly, that it constituted the logical lowed only limited room for maneuver for auton‐ continuation of tendencies apparent in the earlier omous social memory, stands against the relative‐ debate about recognizing Jews as "victims of fas‐ ly autonomous, genuinely democratic West Ger‐ cism," where the intention to exclude them be‐ man development" (p. 135). cause "they did not fght" (p. 64) had been modi‐ While Schmid's book does not look beyond fed for tactical reasons. Those reasons were no 1989 and most of his East-West comparisons refer longer compelling in 1949, while objections to readers to his separate study of western com‐ restoring private property were all the stronger memoration of Reichskristallnacht, Jan Philipp during the accelerating construction of socialism. Spannuth's dissertation on restitution of At times Spannuth seems torn between interpret‐ "Aryanized" property attempts a more compre‐ ing the invocation of anti-capitalist ideology as a hensive approach. By way of background, Span‐ mere fg-leaf and seeing it as a genuine objection nuth provides a concise history of "Aryanization" to the restitution of private property. Either way, a between 1933 and 1945, diferentiating three 1949 Regulation for the Recognition, Provision phases: frst, 1933 to 1937, a period of seemingly and Compensation of the Nazis' Persecuted did "voluntary" sales resulting from anti-Jewish boy‐ not encompass restitution. Indeed, as Spannuth cotts and the general political climate; second, demonstrates, it was based not on a "bourgeois" 1937-1938 as a period of radicalization, at the end notion of compensation for individual losses, but of which "Aryanization" by private parties was all on a socialist understanding of welfare entitle‐ but complete; fnally, from 1939, a period in ments grounded in the generic fact of persecu‐ which the German Reich acquired the remaining tion. property of Jews by virtue of their imposed denat‐ Beyond these debates within the SED, several uralization through emigration or deportation. initiatives occurred elsewhere, particularly at the The core of Spannuth's study begins in its level of the Länder, most of which went nowhere. third chapter, with a reconstruction of the vigor‐ Spannuth shows the marginality of the Soviet au‐ ous discussion about restitution in the SBZ, which thorities, whose sole achievement in this area was was prompted in 1946 by a bill from British-occu‐ the restitution to Jewish communities of at least pied Hamburg. Spannuth demonstrates some sup‐ 122 communal properties--synagogues, cemeter‐ port for restitution within the SED, but that prop‐ ies, schools, etc.--under its 1948 Order No. 82, erty confscated from "Nazi activists and war which "returned" properties confscated under the Nazis to political parties, mass organizations,
7 H-Net Reviews and religious organizations in the SBZ. This was private gastronomic and other businesses on the the only ofcial restitution measure for Baltic coast. In his trial--which ended with a ten- "Aryanized" property in the SBZ/GDR (with the ex‐ year sentence for him--his persecution under the ception of Thuringia, addressed below). Nazis won him no sympathy; indeed, Spannuth East German authorities nevertheless faced shows how his postwar eforts to regain his prop‐ claims for the restitution of individual property, erty were held against him as indicating his fail‐ particularly that acquired by the German Reich ure to learn the lesson of fascism. His entire prop‐ and now in the hands of the GDR. According to erty was nationalized. After 1990, the Treuhan‐ Spannuth, local authorities occasionally acted on danstalt sold the various properties to private in‐ a sense of natural justice and re-entered return‐ vestors, with the proceeds divided among his de‐ ing Jewish owners' names in title registers. Such scendants and the Conference on Jewish Material actions prompted Justice Minister Max Fechner to Claims against Germany (JCC). intervene with the aim of securing formerly Jew‐ In chapter 5, Spannuth presents two regional ish property for the GDR. Against the opposition case studies that add further nuance and depth to of some ofcials, properties seized by the Third his analysis. The frst is the case of a 1945 restitu‐ Reich were prevented from being returned to tion law in Thuringia, the frst of its kind in Ger‐ their rightful Jewish owners, even where the lat‐ many and the only example in the SBZ/GDR. Un‐ ter were still on the title register. Some sporadic der the law, an Ofce for Compensation began an postwar restitutions were even reversed, with active search for "Aryanized" property and a Spe‐ ownership passing, again, to the state. Only occa‐ cial Commissioner for the Administration of For‐ sionally did the authorities ameliorate this scan‐ merly Jewish Property confscated realty and dalous situation by granting the rightful owners frms, placed them under stewardship, and made "privileges" such as occupancy. The victims' only changes to title registers. The law had numerous avenue for redress--and only if they lived in the faws, not least that the property of estates with‐ SBZ/GDR--was civil action, which produced mixed out heirs would fall to the Thuringian state, but results in the few cases in the 1940s and early 50s. some problems were resolved in favor of the vic‐ Meanwhile, private "Aryanizers" who were not tims. Spannuth estimates that most cases of expropriated after 1945 benefted just as the state "Aryanization" in Thuringia were registered and did. Only a small number were criminally prose‐ that approximately 60 percent ended in restitu‐ cuted, and postwar expropriations of "Nazi ac‐ tion. Approximately 300 properties (of 770 regis‐ tivists and war criminals" did not target "Aryaniz‐ tered claims) were restored to their former own‐ ers." ers, who mostly resided abroad. The situation One of the strengths of Spannuth's book lies with businesses was less positive, as postwar se‐ in his use of case studies that highlight the com‐ questrations could not be reversed. Yet even suc‐ plexity of the subject matter and bring to life what cessful claimants faced problems if they were not might otherwise be a dry, legal topic. The frst GDR citizens, especially beginning in 1951, when chapter presents the case of a Jewish hotelier on the property of non-citizens was placed under the island of Rügen who was able to re-acquire state administration. As early as 1948, the SED in‐ two of his "Aryanized" properties but could only dicated its interest not only in a quick end to the administer, rather than re-acquire, his largest ho‐ Thuringian arrangements, but also in acquiring tel because it had been sequestered by the Soviets. the property seized under their aegis, and the law Having resumed his business, he was arrested in was repealed in 1952. Despite its demise and the 1953 as part of "Aktion Rose," which expropriated fact that only those few victims who returned to the SBZ/GDR ultimately benefted, Spannuth right‐
8 H-Net Reviews ly stresses that Thuringia provides a singular ex‐ international pressure to compensate the victims ample of a serious German, rather than occupa‐ of Nazism living abroad. Spannuth argues that in‐ tion-authority, initiative towards restitution, sistence on the need to await a fnal peace treaty which shows, moreover, that the Soviet occupa‐ was both hypocritical (because the SED intended tion authorities were not opposed to restitution. largely to uphold its refusal even then) and naive. The second regional case study is that of East Spannuth highlights the anti-Zionism and anti‐ Berlin. In 1946 the Allies established an ofce in semitism behind ofcial positions on this ques‐ Berlin to secure "Aryanized" Jewish property ex‐ tion. Here, and throughout, he largely confrms propriated by the German Reich with a view to the fndings of Jefrey Herf, Angelika Timm, and restitution. Following the city's division, the Soviet others, fnding a fuid border between anti-Zion‐ commandant created a similar ofce for the east‐ ism and antisemitism even in the Ofce for the ern sector, expanding its responsibilities to pri‐ Legal Protection of the Property of the GDR, vate property. Confscations ended in August 1949 which administered much formerly Jewish prop‐ and confscated property eventually fell under the erty. However, Spannuth's account also indicates control of the Berlin People's Housing Administra‐ that suggestions that East German overtures to tion. By 1955, the city administration was con‐ the JCC in the 1970s and 1980s were based merely fronted with claims from former owners, mainly on antisemitic assumptions about the power of "Aryanizers," and proposed to accede to them. Ac‐ the Jewish lobby in the United States overlook cording to the proposal, the original Jewish own‐ that both U.S. and JCC ofcials drew explicit con‐ ers were either adequately compensated as Vic‐ nections between compensation and most-fa‐ tims of Fascism if GDR citizens, or were undeserv‐ vored-nation status in the United States. ing "Israelite capitalists" if abroad (p. 141). The ad‐ Ultimately, Spannuth suggests, a combination ministration was satisfed that if the "Aryanizers" of "Marxist dogmatism," "material covetousness," had been "active Nazis or war criminals," they and antisemitism explains the SED's refusal to would have been expropriated after the war. De‐ meet the basic demands of the victims through to spite concerns about a revival of the restitution 1989 (p. 164). However, he rightly insists that question, in 1957 the GDR Finance Ministry ap‐ some elements in various sections of the bureau‐ proved the move, thus bowing indirectly to "popu‐ cracy and the judiciary, at the Länder and local lar" pressure, or rather, pressure from the level and even in the upper echelons of the SED, "Aryanizers." The previous Jewish owners were favored a more sympathetic approach. Given such not informed and the decision was not publicized. welcome diferentiation, Spannuth's occasional According to Spannuth, most of the properties references to a unitary "GDR" position or "GDR- were heavily burdened by debt, and it is unclear rhetoric," rather than to the GDR government or how many claims were made. Overall, he sug‐ the SED, are remarkably undiferentiated. His lo‐ gests, serious preparations were undertaken in cation of the end of the GDR in 1989 rather than Berlin in the 1940s for later restitution, but ulti‐ 1990 is simply inaccurate. mately the East German state simply acquired a In contrast with the GDR's commemorative large amount of property, an outcome reinforced culture(s), which, Schmid suggests, simply evapo‐ by the fact that the state automatically acquired rated in 1990, the unfnished business of restitu‐ property belonging to anyone who fed the coun‐ tion became a major issue in that year. In chapter try. 8, Spannuth analyzes the positions of the govern‐ In chapter 6 Spannuth turns to the familiar ments led by Hans Modrow and de Mazière and history of the GDR's evasion, through to 1989, of the issue's treatment during and after the unifca‐
9 H-Net Reviews tion process. Although the expressions of respon‐ ject to a comparative analysis with the fgures for sibility for the Nazi past by representatives of the the eastern states after 1990. Second, his overall new governments and the Volkskammer were characterization of western restitution is domi‐ new in tone and content, frm commitments were nated by the total sums of restitution and com‐ not forthcoming. Early negotiations over unifca‐ pensation achieved over the decades and by pro‐ tion raised fears that property nationalized after gressive judgments of the 1950s, and not by quali‐ 1945 might be privatized or restored without ref‐ tative considerations, such as the signifcant so‐ erence to its previous "Aryanization." Thanks cial, bureaucratic, and judicial resistance to resti‐ largely to prompting by the JCC and the U.S. gov‐ tution in the 1940s and 1950s, which he dubs ernment; both East and West German authorities "silent sabotage" (p. 227). Third, the comparison ensured that this did not occur. As is well known, mutates into a search for lessons learned by the the West German government's preference for 1990s from the earlier experiences and the broad‐ restitution won out against the East German gov‐ er history of facing up to the Nazi past in the ernment's preference for compensation. Never‐ West. Here, Spannuth notes qualitative improve‐ theless, the GDR's only freely elected parliament ments in the 1990s, which he attributes to the in‐ and government adhered to the Treaty of Unifca‐ fuence of those western experiences before 1990 tion, including the appendaged property law that and of western bureaucrats and judges thereafter. recognized property losses under the Third Reich Certainly, western bureaucrats were primarily re‐ as a basis for restitution claims. Spannuth goes on sponsible for the Treaty of Unifcation and its ac‐ to discuss the details of restitution regulations companying legislation, but Spannuth efectively and the practice of restitution in selected eastern concedes that his own suggestion that those re‐ states (again with useful examples), concluding sponsible for the subsequent development of that responsible ofces conscientiously sought to restitution policy and practice were westerners is do justice to difcult problems and to cast light on mere supposition. He overlooks support for resti‐ often dark and dubious expropriations. He also tution within the GDR (particularly in 1990) as attempts a preliminary stock-taking based on data well as the possibility that easterners might also up to 1999 (which refects the period of data col‐ have learned certain lessons, or that they simply lection for his dissertation, but seems old for a applied and upheld the restitution law of the re‐ book published in 2007). In total, Spannuth esti‐ unifed country after 1990. Moreover, the claim mates that the JCC and individuals made approxi‐ that the Federal Republic had learned the lessons mately 130,000 claims on a total value of approxi‐ of its earlier restitution experience is weakened mately 10.5 billion Euros. The success rate, he esti‐ by the fact that the judgments Spannuth cites as mates with considerable caution, approximated evidence were not made until 1998 or 1999, which 19 percent for the JCC and 60 percent for private suggests that the lessons had not been well claims. learned by 1990 and that a new set of experiences Spannuth's concluding diachronic compari‐ was required to tease them out. These shortcom‐ son of post-GDR restitution with earlier eforts in ings in the fnal chapter, attributable in part to the the West is the least satisfying part of the book, fact that Spannuth could not draw on the frst for several reasons. First, he does not assess the monograph on western restitution, do not detract quantitative "success" of western restitution rela‐ substantially from what is otherwise a systematic tive to the regional Jewish population as he does and nuanced study and a signifcant contribution elsewhere in the book, but merely points to the to the literature on the handling of the Nazi past high total sums paid under Allied statutes and the in the SBZ/GDR and reunifed Germany. Like the Federal Restitution Law, which he does not sub‐
10 H-Net Reviews other books under discussion, it will likely be the necessary point of comparison, but often also as standard work on its topic for some time. the authorial locus, as indicated by Schmid's ref‐ What do these books say about the current erences to "here" (meaning the FRG) and "there" state of research in light of the defciencies and (meaning the GDR). Sixth, they indicate that the questions outlined at the beginning? First, they in‐ challenge of Beziehungsgeschichte is being taken dicate that research has certainly moved beyond up, albeit unevenly. Considerable attention is paid the 1940s and 1950s, with the books discussed to the impact of western developments on the here addressing the 1960s, the decades through East, but considerably less to infuences in the 1989, or even the end of the frst post-unifcation other direction. Moreover, it is noteworthy that decade. Secondly, they confrm the strength of the separate monographs have recently been pub‐ SED regime's desire for a monopoly on, and the lished, in one case even by the same author, on extent of its eforts to control, the interpretation the comparable subject in the West; synthetic of policies toward the past. They also provide studies of East and West are the exception. Finally, much support for the view that the GDR failed to and perhaps unsurprisingly given the subject address the legacies of Nazism and especially the matter, moral and normative preoccupations re‐ persecution of the Jews. Indeed, they identify not main and, although the books are by no means only the regime's pragmatic failure to punish ma‐ uncritical of developments there, the Federal Re‐ jor and minor Nazi criminals, to provide restitu‐ public (of the late 1980s or later) still features as tion to Jewish victims, and to refect critically on the interpretative and evaluative norm. In short, the Nazi past, but also its own antisemitism and progress has been made, but we are still some desire to hold on to "Aryanized" property. They of‐ way from historicization. fer substantial support to the damning interpreta‐ Notes tion outlined at the outset. However, third, all [1]. For a more recent rehearsal of the stan‐ three books also suggest, if less emphatically, that dard critique, see Manfred Agethen, Eckhard a monolithic regime-centered interpretation is in‐ Jesse, and Ehrhardt Neubert, eds., Der miss‐ sufcient. To varying degrees, they indicate the brauchte Antifaschismus: DDR-Staatsdoktrin und existence of alternative, dissenting discourses or Lebenslüge der deutschen Linken (Freiburg: of internal nuances within the regime. Neverthe‐ Herder, 2002). For a critical discussion of post- less, these remain marginal to the authors' overall Wende debate about East German antifascism, see interpretations. Such alternative views, like those Robert Erlinghagen, Die Diskussion um den Be‐ from below, could be given more weight, as could grif des Antifaschismus seit 1989/90 (Berlin: Ar‐ their development after 1989. Fourth, in small gument Verlag, 1997). For a discussion of the han‐ ways, the three books also point to the substantive dling of antifascism and related matters by feder‐ accuracy or the personal legitimacy of certain as‐ al politicians and their allied scholars in the con‐ pects even of ofcial approaches to the past or its text of "working through" the East German past, legacy, such as accounts of IG Farben's role at see Andrew H. Beattie, Playing Politics with Histo‐ Auschwitz or the tainted pasts of Federal Republi‐ ry: The Bundestag Inquiries into East Germany can elites, which are often overlooked in critiques (New York: Berghahn Books, 2008), 161-193. of the regime's "instrumentalization" of the past. [2]. For a more sophisticated version of this Fifth, although the authors make some efort to narrative, see Jefrey Herf, "Legacies of Divided understand GDR policies and practices on their Memory and the Berlin Republic," in Germany at own terms, they still view the GDR from outside, Fifty-Five: Berlin ist nicht Bonn?, ed. James Sper‐ from the perspective of the Federal Republic, which features not only as the most obvious and
11 H-Net Reviews ling (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004), 83-111. [3]. See Jürgen Danyel, "DDR-Antifaschismus: Rückblick auf zehn Jahre Diskussion, ofene Fra‐ gen und Forschungsperspektiven," in Vielstim‐ miges Schweigen: Neue Studien zum DDR-An‐ tifaschismus, eds. Annette Leo and Peter Reif- Spirek (Berlin: Metropol, 2001), 7-19. [4]. See Alan Steinweis, "Review of Pendas, Devin O., The Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial, 1963-1965: Genocide, History, and the Limits of the Law," H-German, H-Net Reviews. December, 2006. URL: http://www.h-net.org/reviews/ showrev.php?id=12646 . [5]. Andreas Hilger, "'Die Gerechtigkeit nehme ihren Lauf'? Die Bestrafung deutsche Kriegs- und Gewaltverbrecher in der Sowjetunion und der SBZ/DDR," in Transnationale Vergangenheitspoli‐ tik: Der Umgang mit deutschen Kriegsverbrechern in Europa nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg, ed. Nor‐ bert Frei (Göttingen: Wallstein, 2006), 180-246, here p. 215. [6]. Harald Schmid, Erinnern an den "Tag der Schuld": Das Novemberpogrom von 1938 in der deutschen Geschichtspolitik (Hamburg: Dölling & Galitz, 2001). [7]. Jürgen Lillteicher, Raub, Recht und Resti‐ tution: Die Rückerstattung jüdischen Eigentums in der frühen Bundesrepublik (Göttingen: Wallstein Verlag, 2007). See Berthold Unfried, "Review of Lillteicher, Jürgen, Raub, Recht und Restitution: Die Rückerstattung jüdischen Eigentums in der frühen Bundesrepublik and Spannuth, Jan Philipp, Rückerstattung Ost: Der Umgang der DDR mit dem 'arisierten' und enteigneten Eigentum der Ju‐ den und die Gestaltung der Rückerstattung im wiedervereinigten Deutschland," H-Soz-u-Kult, H- Net Reviews. October, 2007. URL: http://www.h- net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=22008 .
If there is additional discussion of this review, you may access it through the network, at https://networks.h-net.org/h-german
12 H-Net Reviews
Citation: Andrew Beattie. Review of Dirks, Christian. "Die Verbrechen der anderen": Auschwitz und der Auschwitz-Prozess der DDR. Das Verfahren gegen den KZ-Arzt Dr. Horst Fischer. ; Schmid, Harald. Antifaschismus und Judenverfolgung: Die "Reichskristallnacht" als politischer Gedenktag in der DDR. ; Spannuth, Jan Philipp. Rückerstattung Ost: Der Umgang der DDR mit dem "arisierten" und enteigneten Eigentum der Juden und die Gestaltung der Rückerstattung im wiedervereinigten Deutschland. H-German, H-Net Reviews. May, 2009.
URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=24456
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
13