DOCSLIB.ORG

Trials War Criminals

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Trials War Criminals TRIALS OF WAR CRIMINALS BEFORE THE NUERNBERG MILITARY TRIBUNALS UNDER CONTROL COUNCIL LAW No. 10 NUERNBERG OCTOBER 1946-APRIL 1949 VOLUME IV/1 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. “THE EINSATZGRUPPEN CASE" Military Tribunal II Case No. 9 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA —against — Otto Ohlendorf, Heinz Jost, Erich Naumann, Otto Rasch, Erwi Schulz, Franz Six, Paul Blo- bel, walter Blume, Martin Sandberger, Willy Seibert, Eugen Steimle, Ernst Biberstein, Wer- ner Brauner, Walter Haensch, Gustav Nosske, Adolf Otto, Eduard Strauche, Emil Hauss- mann, Waldemar Klingelhoefer, Lothar Fendler, Waldemar von Radetzky, Felix Ruehl, Heinz Schubert, and Matthias Graf, Defendants XI. OPINION AND JUDGMENT............................................................................................. 5 EINSATZGRUPPEN............................................................................................................. 7 AUTHENTICITY OF REPORTS.......................................................................................... 9 THE MAGNITUDE OF THE ENTERPRISE ..................................................................... 18 EMPLOYMENT AS LABOR BEFORE EXECUTION ..................................................... 24 INSTIGATION TO POGROMS.......................................................................................... 25 APPROPRIATION OF PERSONAL EFFECTS AND VALUABLES .............................. 28 PRISONERS OF WAR........................................................................................................ 30 METHODS OF EXECUTION............................................................................................. 32 THE LAW............................................................................................................................ 40 Jurisdiction ....................................................................................................................... 40 Article II ........................................................................................................................... 42 International Law Applied to Individual Wrong-Doers................................................... 46 Self-Defense and Necessity.............................................................................................. 48 Mass Killings for ideological Reasons............................................................................. 50 Death of Noncombatants by Bombing............................................................................. 51 Superior Orders ................................................................................................................ 54 Duress Needed for Plea of Superior Orders ..................................................................... 63 German Precedent on Superior Order Doctrine ............................................................... 66 Noninvolvement............................................................................................................... 70 Partisans ........................................................................................................................... 73 Reprisals........................................................................................................................... 74 Criminal Organizations .................................................................................................... 75 SS 75 Gestapo and SD 76 Crimes Against Humanity................................................................................................ 77 Simferopol........................................................................................................................ 79 The Fuehrerprinzip............................................................................................................... 84 INDIVIDUAL JUDGMENT.................................................................................................... 87 DEFENDANT OTTO OHLENDORF................................................................................. 88 HEINZ JOST........................................................................................................................ 90 DEFENDANT ERICH NAUMANN................................................................................... 92 ERWIN SCHULZ ................................................................................................................ 95 FRANZ SIX ......................................................................................................................... 98 PAUL BLOBEL................................................................................................................. 102 WALTER BLUME ............................................................................................................ 104 MARTIN SANDBERGER ................................................................................................ 107 WILLY SEIBERT.............................................................................................................. 110 EUGEN STEIMLE ............................................................................................................ 113 ERNST BIBERSTEIN ....................................................................................................... 115 WERNER BRAUNE.......................................................................................................... 118 WALTER HAENSCH ....................................................................................................... 119 GUSTAV NOSSKE ........................................................................................................... 126 ADOLF OTT...................................................................................................................... 129 EDUARD STRAUCH........................................................................................................ 133 WALDEMAR KLINGELHOEFER .................................................................................. 137 LOTHAR FENDLER......................................................................................................... 139 WALDEMAT VON RADETZKY .................................................................................... 141 FELIX RUEHL .................................................................................................................. 146 HEINZ HERMANN SCHUBERT..................................................................................... 148 MATHIAS GRAF.............................................................................................................. 151 SENTENCES ......................................................................................................................... 153 XI. OPINION AND JUDGMENT The indictment filed in this case on 29 July 1947 charged the 24 defendants enumer- ated therein with crimes against humanity, war crimes, and membership in criminal organizations. The 24 defendants were made up of 6 SS generals, 5 SS colonels, 6 SS lieutenant colonels, 4 SS majors, and 3 SS junior officers. Since the filing of the indictment the number of the defendants has been reduced to 22. Defendant SS Ma- jor Emil Haussmann committed suicide on 31 July 1947, and defendant SS Brigadier General Otto Rasch was severed from the case on 5 February 1948 because of his inability to testify. Although it is assumed that Rasch's disease (paralysis against or Parkinsonism) will become progressively worse, his severance from these proceed- ings not to be regarded as any adjudication on the question of guilt or innocence. The acts charged in counts one and two of the indictment are identical in character, but the indictment draws the distinction between acts constituting offenses against civilian populations, including German nationals and nationals of other countries, and the same acts committed as violations of the laws and customs of war involving mur- der and ill-treatment of prisoners of war and civilian populations of countries under the occupation of Germany. Count three charges the defendants with membership in the SS, SD, and Gestapo, organizations declared criminal by the International Mili- tary Tribunal and paragraph I (d) of article II of Control Council Law No. 10. Although the indictment accuses the defendants of the commission of atrocities, per- secutions, exterminations, imprisonment, and other inhumane acts, the principle charge in this case is murder. However, as unequivocal as this charge is, questions have arisen which must be definitely resolved so that this decision may add its voice in the present solemn re-affirmation and sound development of international precepts binding upon nations and individuals alike, to the end that never again will humanity witness the sad and miserable spectacle it has beheld and suffered during these last years. At the outset it must be acknowledged that the facts with which the Tribunal must deal in this opinion are so beyond the experience of normal man and the range of man-made phenomena that only the most complete judicial inquiry, and the most ex- haustive trial, could verify and confirm them. Although the principle accusation is murder and, unhappily, man has been killing man ever since {411} the days of Cain, the charge of purposeful homicide in this case reaches such fantas- tic proportions and surpasses such credible limits that believability must be bolstered with assurance a hundred times repeated.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Shoah 1 Shoah
    Shoah 1 Shoah [1] (« catastrophe » ,שואה : Le terme Shoah (hébreu désigne l'extermination par l'Allemagne nazie des trois quarts des Juifs de l'Europe occupée[2] , soit les deux tiers de la population juive européenne totale et environ 40 % des Juifs du monde, pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale ; ce qui représente entre cinq et six millions de victimes selon les estimations des historiens[3] . Ce génocide des Juifs constituait pour les nazis « la Solution finale à la question juive » (die Endlösung der Judenfrage). Le terme français d’Holocauste est également utilisé et l’a précédé. Le terme « judéocide » est également utilisé par certains pour qualifier la Destruction du ghetto de Varsovie, avril 1943. Shoah. L'extermination des Juifs, cible principale des nazis, fut perpétrée par la faim dans les ghettos de Pologne et d'URSS occupées, par les fusillades massives des unités mobiles de tuerie des Einsatzgruppen sur le front de l'Est (la « Shoah par balles »), au moyen de l'extermination par le travail forcé dans les camps de concentration, dans les « camions à gaz », et dans les chambres à gaz des camps d'extermination. L'horreur de ce « crime de masse »[4] a conduit, après-guerre, à l'élaboration des notions juridiques de « crime contre l'humanité »[5] et de « génocide »[6] , utilisé postérieurement dans d'autres contextes (génocide arménien, génocide des Tutsi, etc.). Une très grave lacune du droit international humanitaire a également été complétée avec l'adoption des Conventions de Genève de 1949, qui protègent la population civile en temps de guerre[7] . L'extermination des Juifs durant la Seconde Guerre mondiale se distingue par son caractère industriel, bureaucratique et systématique qui la rend unique dans l'histoire de l'humanité[8] .
    [Show full text]
  • SS-Totenkopfverbände from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia (Redirected from SS-Totenkopfverbande)
    Create account Log in Article Talk Read Edit View history SS-Totenkopfverbände From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from SS-Totenkopfverbande) Navigation Not to be confused with 3rd SS Division Totenkopf, the Waffen-SS fighting unit. Main page This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. No cleanup reason Contents has been specified. Please help improve this article if you can. (December 2010) Featured content Current events This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding Random article citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2010) Donate to Wikipedia [2] SS-Totenkopfverbände (SS-TV), rendered in English as "Death's-Head Units" (literally SS-TV meaning "Skull Units"), was the SS organization responsible for administering the Nazi SS-Totenkopfverbände Interaction concentration camps for the Third Reich. Help The SS-TV was an independent unit within the SS with its own ranks and command About Wikipedia structure. It ran the camps throughout Germany, such as Dachau, Bergen-Belsen and Community portal Buchenwald; in Nazi-occupied Europe, it ran Auschwitz in German occupied Poland and Recent changes Mauthausen in Austria as well as numerous other concentration and death camps. The Contact Wikipedia death camps' primary function was genocide and included Treblinka, Bełżec extermination camp and Sobibor. It was responsible for facilitating what was called the Final Solution, Totenkopf (Death's head) collar insignia, 13th Standarte known since as the Holocaust, in collaboration with the Reich Main Security Office[3] and the Toolbox of the SS-Totenkopfverbände SS Economic and Administrative Main Office or WVHA.
    [Show full text]
  • Spaces of Killing Using National Research to Inform Your Classroom Practice
    CENTRE FOR HOLOCAUST EDUCATION The entrance sign to Treblinka. Credit: Yad Vashem Spaces of killing Using national research to inform your classroom practice. Highlights from our research report ‘What do students know and understand about Research the Holocaust?’ Evidence from English secondary schools (Foster et al, 2016) briefing 4 Free to download at www.holocausteducation.org.uk/research If students are to understand the significance of the Holocaust and the full enormity of its scope and scale, they need to appreciate that it was a continent-wide genocide. Why does this matter? The perpetrators ultimately sought to kill every Jew, everywhere they could reach them with victims Knowledge of the ‘spaces of killing’ is crucial to an understanding of the uprooted from communities across Europe. It is therefore crucial to know about the geography of the Holocaust. If students do not appreciate the scale of the killings outside of Holocaust relating to the development of the concentration camp system; the location, role and purpose Germany and particularly the East, then it is impossible to grasp the devastation of the ghettos; where and when Nazi killing squads committed mass shootings; and the evolution of the of Jewish communities in Europe or the destruction of diverse and vibrant death camps. cultures that had developed over centuries. This briefing, the fourth in our series, explores students’ knowledge and understanding of these key Entire communities lost issues, drawing on survey research and focus group interviews with more than 8,000 11 to 18 year olds. Thousands of small towns and villages in Poland, Ukraine, Crimea, the Baltic states and Russia, which had a majority Jewish population before the war, are now home to not a single Jewish person.
    [Show full text]
  • The Perpetrators of the November 1938 Pogrom Through German-Jewish Eyes
    Chapter 4 The Perpetrators of the November 1938 Pogrom through German-Jewish Eyes Alan E. Steinweis The November 1938 pogrom, often referred to as the “Kristallnacht,” was the largest and most significant instance of organized anti-Jewish violence in Nazi Germany before the Second World War.1 In addition to the massive destruc- tion of synagogues and property, the pogrom involved the physical abuse and terrorizing of German Jews on a massive scale. German police reported an official death toll of 91, but the actual number of Jews killed was probably about ten times that many when one includes fatalities among Jews who were treated brutally during their arrest and subsequent imprisonment in Dachau, Buchenwald, and Sachsenhausen.2 Violence had been a normal feature of the Nazi regime’s anti-Jewish measures since 1933,3 but the scale and intensity of the Kristallnacht were unprecedented. The pogrom occurred less than one year before the outbreak of the war and the first atrocities by the Wehrmacht against Polish Jews, and less than three years before the Einsatzgruppen, Order Police, and other units began to undertake the mass murder of Jews in the Soviet Union. Knowledge about the perpetrators of the pogrom, therefore, pro- vides important context for understanding the violence that came later. To be sure, nobody has yet undertaken the extremely ambitious project to identify precisely which perpetrators of the Kristallnacht eventually would participate directly in the “Final Solution.” There certainly were many such cases, however, perhaps the most notable being Odilo Globocnik, who presided over the po- grom violence in Vienna in November 1938 and less than three years later was placed in charge of Operation Reinhardt, the mass murder of the Jews in the General Government.4 1 Many of the observations in this chapter are based on cases described and documented in the author’s book, Kristallnacht 1938 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009).
    [Show full text]
  • Criminals with Doctorates: an SS Officer in the Killing Fields of Russia
    1 Criminals with Doctorates An SS Officer in the Killing Fields of Russia, as Told by the Novelist Jonathan Littell Henry A. Lea University of Massachusetts-Amherst Lecture Delivered at the University of Vermont November 18, 2009 This is a report about the Holocaust novel The Kindly Ones which deals with events that were the subject of a war crimes trial in Nuremberg. By coincidence I was one of the courtroom interpreters at that trial; several defendants whose testimony I translated appear as major characters in Mr. Littell's novel. This is as much a personal report as an historical one. The purpose of this paper is to call attention to the murders committed by Nazi units in Russia in World War II. These crimes remain largely unknown to the general public. My reasons for combining a discussion of the actual trial with a critique of the novel are twofold: to highlight a work that, as far as I know, is the first extensive literary treatment of these events published in the West and to compare the author's account with what I witnessed at the trial. In the spring of 1947, an article in a Philadelphia newspaper reported that translators were needed at the Nuremberg Trials. I applied successfully and soon found myself in Nuremberg translating documents that were needed for the ongoing cases. After 2 passing a test for courtroom interpreters I was assigned to the so-called Einsatzgruppen Case. Einsatzgruppen is a jargon word denoting special task forces that were sent to Russia to kill Jews, Gypsies, so-called Asiatics, Communist officials and some mental patients.
    [Show full text]
  • Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction Du Branch Patrimoine De I'edition
    Library and Bibliotheque et 1*1 Archives Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-38002-4 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-38002-4 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives and Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, prefer, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans loan, distribute and sell theses le monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, worldwide, for commercial or non­ sur support microforme, papier, electronique commercial purposes, in microform, et/ou autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. this thesis. Neither the thesis Ni la these ni des extraits substantiels de nor substantial extracts from it celle-ci ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement may be printed or otherwise reproduits sans son autorisation. reproduced without the author's permission. In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne Privacy Act some supporting sur la protection de la vie privee, forms may have been removed quelques formulaires secondaires from this thesis. ont ete enleves de cette these.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Motivation - the Motivation and Actions of the Einsatzgruppen by Walter S
    Special Motivation - The Motivation and Actions of the Einsatzgruppen by Walter S. Zapotoczny "...Then, stark naked, they had to run down more steps to an underground corridor that Led back up the ramp, where the gas van awaited them." Franz Schalling Einsatzgruppen policeman Like every historical event, the Holocaust evokes certain specific images. When mentioning the Holocaust, most people think of the concentration camps. They immediately envision emaciated victims in dirty striped uniforms staring incomprehensibly at their liberators or piles of corpses, too numerous to bury individually, bulldozed into mass graves. While those are accurate images, they are merely the product of the systematization of the genocide committed by the Third Reich. The reality of that genocide began not in the camps or in the gas chambers but with four small groups of murderers known as the Einsatzgruppen. Formed by Heinrich Himmler, Reichsfuhrer-SS, and Reinhard Heydrich, head of the Reich Security Main Office (RSHA), they operated in the territories captured by the German armies with the cooperation of German army units (Wehrmacht ) and local militias. By the spring of 1943, when the Germans began their retreat from Soviet territory, the Einsatzgruppen had murdered 1.25 million Jews and hundreds of thousands of Polish, Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian and Soviet nationals, including prisoners of war. The Einsatzgruppen massacres preceded the invention of the death camps and significantly influenced their development. The Einsatzgruppen story offers insight into a fundamental Holocaust question of what made it possible for men, some of them ordinary men, to kill so many people so ruthlessly. The members of the Einsatzgruppen had developed a special motivation to kill.
    [Show full text]
  • From Nuremberg to Now: Benjamin Ferencz's
    “Are you going to help me save the world?” From Nuremberg to Now: Benjamin Ferencz’s Lifelong Stand for “Law. Not War.” Creed King and Kate Powell Senior Division Group Exhibit Student-composed Words: 493 Process Paper: 500 words Process Paper Who took a stand for the Jews after World War II? Pondering this compelling question, we stumbled upon the story of Benjamin Ferencz. As a young lawyer, Ferencz convinced fellow attorneys at the Nuremberg Trials to prosecute the Einsatzgruppen, Hitler’s roving extermination squads, in the “biggest murder trial of the century” (Tusa). Ferencz convicted all twenty-two defendants, then parlayed his Nuremberg experience into a lifelong stand for world peace through the application of law. Our discovery that Ferencz, at age ninety-seven, is the last living Nuremberg prosecutor – and living in our home state – led to a remarkable interview. We began by researching primary sources such as oral histories and evidence gathered after the war by the War Crimes Branch of the US Army and compared these to personal accounts archived by the Florida State University Institute on World War II. Reading memos and logbooks kept by the Nazis helped us understand the significance of Ferencz’s stand at Nuremberg. Ferencz’s papers provided interviews, photographs, and documents to corroborate historical data and underscore his lifelong advocacy for peace. For a firsthand perspective, we conducted several personal interviews. Talking with Ferencz about his transformation from prosecutor to modern activist for world peace and Zelda Fuksman on surviving the Holocaust and her perspective on the Nuremberg Trials were two crucial pieces of research.
    [Show full text]
  • I. Regionale Organisation Des SD
    I. Regionale Organisation des SD 1. Räumliche Gliederung Analog zu seiner Stellung im Gefüge der nationalsozialistischen Herrschaft war auch die räumliche Gliederung des Sicherheitsdienstes nicht statisch, sondern stän- dig im Wandel begriffen. Die äußere Hülle präsentiert sich unstetig und ist ähnlich schwer zu fassen wie sein innerer Charakter. Zwischen 1932 und 1945 wurden fast im Jahresrhythmus Reorganisationen durchgeführt, die die räumlichen Grenzzie- hungen und regionalen Unterstellungsverhältnisse immer wieder veränderten.1 Dies trifft besonders auf den mitteldeutschen Raum zu, der mit den Ländern Sachsen, Thüringen, Anhalt und Preußen bereits auf staatlicher Seite stark zer- klüftet war.2 Deshalb scheint hier eine Darstellung, die - anders als der größte Teil dieser Arbeit - dem Ablauf auf der Zeitachse chronologisch folgen wird, ange- bracht, um weiterführende Prozesse und Merkmale in ihrer regionalen Reichweite richtig abschätzen zu können. Im Hinblick auf den regionalen Schwerpunkt dieser Arbeit wird die besondere Aufmerksamkeit auf der Entwicklung im Land Sachsen liegen. Um für dieses Land die Verbindung von der Organisationsgeschichte zur Bio- grafieforschung zu finden, werden in einem direkt anschließenden Exkurs die ent- scheidenden SD-Führer porträtiert. Da es sowohl aus den zentralistischen Organi- sationsstrukturen heraus als auch von der Selbsteinschätzung dieser Männer her nie einen spezifisch „sächsischen" Sicherheitsdienst gegeben hat, ist Mitteldeutsch- land die entscheidende Größe. Im biografischen Teil soll es darum gehen, welchen biografischen Hintergrund die Männer hatten, die die Strukturen ausfüllten. Um diese regionale Elite einord- nen, ihre spezifische Mentalität und die von Heydrich zugewiesene Aufgabe als an allen Fronten einsetzbare politische Kämpfer erkennen zu können, darf sich die Darstellung nicht auf deren Zeit in Sachsen beschränken.
    [Show full text]
  • Clemency in a Nazi War Crimes Trial By: Allison Ernest
    Evading the Hangman’s Noose: Clemency in a Nazi War Crimes Trial By: Allison Ernest Ernest 2 Contents Introduction: The Foundations for a War Crimes Trial Program 3 Background and Historiography 10 Chapter 1: Investigations into Other Trials Erode the United States’ Resolve 17 Chapter 2: The Onset of Trial Fatigue Due to Public Outcry 25 Chapter 3: High Commissioner McCloy Authorizes Sentence Reviews 38 Chapter 4: McCloy and the United States Set the War Criminals Free 45 Conclusion: A Lesson to be Learned 52 Chart: A Complicated Timeline Simplified 57 Bibliography 58 Ernest 3 Introduction: The Foundations for a War Crimes Trial Program “There is a supervening affirmative duty to prosecute the doers of serious offenses that falls on those who are empowered to do so on behalf of a civilized community. This duty corresponds to our fundamental rights as citizens and as persons to receive and give respect to each other in view of our possession of such rights.” Such duty, outlined by contemporary philosopher Alan S. Rosenbaum, was no better exemplified than in the case of Nazi war criminals in the aftermath of World War II. Even before the floundering Axis powers of Germany and Japan declared their respective official surrenders in 1945, the leaders of the Allies prepared possible courses of action for the surviving criminals in the inevitable collapse of the Nazi regime. Since the beginning of the war in 1939, the Nazi regime in Germany implemented a policy of waging a war so barbaric in its execution that the total numbers of casualties rivaled whole populations of countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Jewish Behavior During the Holocaust
    VICTIMS’ POLITICS: JEWISH BEHAVIOR DURING THE HOLOCAUST by Evgeny Finkel A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Political Science) at the UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN–MADISON 2012 Date of final oral examination: 07/12/12 The dissertation is approved by the following members of the Final Oral Committee: Yoshiko M. Herrera, Associate Professor, Political Science Scott G. Gehlbach, Professor, Political Science Andrew Kydd, Associate Professor, Political Science Nadav G. Shelef, Assistant Professor, Political Science Scott Straus, Professor, International Studies © Copyright by Evgeny Finkel 2012 All Rights Reserved i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation could not have been written without the encouragement, support and help of many people to whom I am grateful and feel intellectually, personally, and emotionally indebted. Throughout the whole period of my graduate studies Yoshiko Herrera has been the advisor most comparativists can only dream of. Her endless enthusiasm for this project, razor- sharp comments, constant encouragement to think broadly, theoretically, and not to fear uncharted grounds were exactly what I needed. Nadav Shelef has been extremely generous with his time, support, advice, and encouragement since my first day in graduate school. I always knew that a couple of hours after I sent him a chapter, there would be a detailed, careful, thoughtful, constructive, and critical (when needed) reaction to it waiting in my inbox. This awareness has made the process of writing a dissertation much less frustrating then it could have been. In the future, if I am able to do for my students even a half of what Nadav has done for me, I will consider myself an excellent teacher and mentor.
    [Show full text]
  • Memories for a Blessing Jewish Mourning Rituals and Commemorative Practices in Postwar Belarus and Ukraine, 1944-1991
    Memories for a Blessing Jewish Mourning Rituals and Commemorative Practices in Postwar Belarus and Ukraine, 1944-1991 by Sarah Garibov A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (History) in University of Michigan 2017 Doctoral Committee: Professor Ronald Suny, Co-Chair Professor Jeffrey Veidlinger, Co-Chair Emeritus Professor Todd Endelman Professor Zvi Gitelman Sarah Garibov [email protected] ORCID ID: 0000-0001-5417-6616 © Sarah Garibov 2017 DEDICATION To Grandma Grace (z”l), who took unbounded joy in the adventures and accomplishments of her grandchildren. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First and foremost, I am forever indebted to my remarkable committee. The faculty labor involved in producing a single graduate is something I have never taken for granted, and I am extremely fortunate to have had a committee of outstanding academics and genuine mentshn. Jeffrey Veidlinger, thank you for arriving at Michigan at the perfect moment and for taking me on mid-degree. From the beginning, you have offered me a winning balance of autonomy and accountability. I appreciate your generous feedback on my drafts and your guidance on everything from fellowships to career development. Ronald Suny, thank you for always being a shining light of positivity and for contributing your profound insight at all the right moments. Todd Endelman, thank you for guiding me through modern Jewish history prelims with generosity and rigor. You were the first to embrace this dissertation project, and you have faithfully encouraged me throughout the writing process. Zvi Gitelman, where would I be without your wit and seykhl? Thank you for shepherding me through several tumultuous years and for remaining a steadfast mentor and ally.
    [Show full text]