 | |
| Author | Telford Taylor |
|---|---|
| Language | English |
| Publisher | Quadrangle |
Publication date | June 1970 |
| Media type | Hardcover Paperback |
| Pages | 224 pages |
| ISBN | 0-8129-0210-6 |
Nuremberg and Vietnam: An American Tragedy is a 1970 book written by Telford Taylor, the Chief Counsel Prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials.
Nuremberg and Vietnam: An American Tragedy is an examination of the United States' conduct of the Vietnam War in comparison to the actions taken by Nazi Germany during the Second World War. Taylor chose as the epigraph to the book an excerpt from a 1946 statement by Gen. Douglas MacArthur confirming the death sentence imposed by a U. S. military commission on Japanese General Tomoyuki Yamashita:
The soldier, be he friend or foe, is charged with the protection of the weak and unarmed. It is the very essence and reason for his being. When he violates this sacred trust, he not only profanes his entire cult, but threatens the very fabric of international society. The traditions of fighting men are long and honorable. They are based upon the noblest of human traits—sacrifice.
Telford Taylor, was once the Chief Counsel Prosecutor at the war crimes trials of Nazi leaders in Nuremberg, Germany from 1946–1949. In that capacity, Taylor helped to establish the laws by which Nazi war criminals would be tried for their crimes.
The book begins with a lengthy history of war crimes beginning with the "knightly chivalry" of the medieval period. These rules were put into place in order to minimize unnecessary cruelties during the course of warfare. The rules protected civilian populations from massacre and the needless spread of disease. Thus, the blanket of immunity that protects soldiers from being held criminally responsible for murder committed during the course of warfare had to be carefully balanced so as to discourage wartime atrocities.
The laws of war remained largely unwritten until U.S. President Abraham Lincoln approved the "Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field", in 1863. Concerning spies, prisoners of war, and the punishment of war crimes, this document comprising 159 articles facilitated the formation of military tribunals and later led to a demand for the formalization of international laws of warfare. Thus, international laws of warfare were codified by means of a series of treaties known as the Hague and Geneva conventions. The most important consequence of these treaties is that all nations, whether signatory or otherwise, were bound by international laws of war.
The Nuremberg Trials, for which Taylor served as a leading figure, gave rise to several developments in regard to international law as applied to warfare. First, it gave international jurisdiction to the prosecution of war crimes; and second, it obligated individuals engaged in warfare to adhere to international laws of conduct over and above those of their respective armies. Of greatest importance with respect to this book, however, is that the United States as a result of its participation emerged as legally, morally, and politically bound to the principles that resulted from the Nuremberg trials. Thus, Taylor is concerned by how the principles of the Nuremberg trials would apply to the United States' conduct of the Vietnam War.
When Nuremberg and Vietnam: An American Tragedy was published, those in favor of and those in opposition to the United States involvement in Vietnam frequently cited the Nuremberg trials in support of their positions. Those in favor of United States involvement argued that North Vietnam attacked South Vietnam in violation of Article 2 of the United Nations Charter; South Vietnam was justified in using force to repel such an attack; and this in turn allowed the United States to join with South Vietnam as provided by Article 51.
However some[ who? ] would claim that the US and South Vietnamese actions in the Vietnam War would constitute "aggressive warfare" by the standards of Nuremberg. Taylor points out that the definition of "aggressive warfare" is ambiguous, thus severely hindering any attempt to determine which of the belligerent powers involved in the Vietnam War could be deemed the "aggressor." What's more, such ambiguities lead to several related questions, such as the legality of refusing to serve in Vietnam. At the time, many conscientious objectors refused to serve in Vietnam on the grounds that their complicity in what they viewed as an illegal war made them, by implication, guilty of crimes against humanity.
Taylor cites possible war crimes in regard to the Son My incident, which is more commonly known as the My Lai Massacre of 1968 /ˈmiːlaɪ/ . It is in this portion of the book that Taylor makes the most extensive comparison of Nuremberg to the Vietnam War. In this section, Taylor quotes two eyewitness accounts, each from a different war. One account, written by a German construction engineer, describes the killing of Jews during the Holocaust by German SS officers in 1942. This account is juxtaposed on the adjacent page by an eyewitness account of the My Lai Massacre. The accounts are similar, yet Taylor explains all of the differences, and in characteristically unbiased fashion shows the difficulty in determining whether or not crimes were committed by the United States.
Taylor also raises domestic problems with regard to the United States' involvement in the Vietnam War. According to Taylor, it remains to be seen whether the United States Congress or the Executive branch of government held responsibility for officially declaring military action in Vietnam. It is the opinion of Taylor that both the President and the Congress bear responsibility, and that the Vietnam War could only be ended by an act of national will, rather than by judicial means.
Nuremberg and Vietnam: An American Tragedy, is an account of the Vietnam War in regard to international law, written by an expert on the subject. It stands not as an accusation, but as an exposition of possible problems faced by the United States as a result of its involvement in the Vietnam War. The Nuremberg Trials are used more or less as a counterpoint, though this in itself shows that Taylor opposed the Vietnam War.
The Nuremberg trials were held by the Allies against representatives of the defeated Nazi Germany, for plotting and carrying out invasions of other countries, and other crimes, in World War II.
A war crime is a violation of the laws of war that gives rise to individual criminal responsibility for actions by combatants in action, such as intentionally killing civilians or intentionally killing prisoners of war, torture, taking hostages, unnecessarily destroying civilian property, deception by perfidy, wartime sexual violence, pillaging, and for any individual that is part of the command structure who orders any attempt to committing mass killings including genocide or ethnic cleansing, the granting of no quarter despite surrender, the conscription of children in the military and flouting the legal distinctions of proportionality and military necessity.
Crimes against humanity are widespread or systemic acts committed by or on behalf of a de facto authority, usually a state, that grossly violate human rights. Unlike war crimes, crimes against humanity do not have to take place within the context of war, and apply to widespread practices rather than acts committed by individuals. Although crimes against humanity apply to acts committed by or on behalf of authorities, they need not be official policy, and require only tolerance rather than explicit approval. The first prosecution for crimes against humanity took place at the Nuremberg trials. Initially being considered for legal use, widely in international law, following the Holocaust a global standard of human rights was articulated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). Political groups or states that violate or incite violation of human rights norms, as found in the Declaration, are an expression of the political pathologies associated with crimes against humanity.
Victor's justice is a term used to refer to a distorted application of justice to the defeated by the victorious party following an armed conflict. Victor's justice generally involves excessive or unjustified punishment of defeated parties and light punishment or clemency for offenses committed by victors. Victors' justice can refer to manifestations of a difference in rules which can amount to hypocrisy and revenge of retributive justice leading to injustice. Victors' justice may also refer to a misrepresentation of historical recording of the events and actions of the losing party throughout and/or preceding the conflict.
The Doctors' Trial was the first of 12 trials for war crimes of high-ranking German officials and industrialists that the United States authorities held in their occupation zone in Nuremberg, Germany, after the end of World War II. These trials were held before US military courts, not before the International Military Tribunal, but took place in the same rooms at the Palace of Justice. The trials are collectively known as the "subsequent Nuremberg trials", formally the "Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals" (NMT).
Telford Taylor was an American lawyer and professor. Taylor was known for his role as lead counsel in the prosecution of war criminals after World War II, his opposition to McCarthyismin the 1950s, and his outspoken criticism of the US' actions during the Vietnam War.
The Judges' Trial was the third of the 12 trials for war crimes the U.S. authorities held in their occupation zone in Germany in Nuremberg after the end of World War II. These twelve trials were all held before U.S. military courts, not before the International Military Tribunal, but took place in the same rooms at the Palace of Justice. The twelve U.S. trials are collectively known as the "Subsequent Nuremberg Trials" or, more formally, as the "Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals" (NMT).
The subsequent Nuremberg trials were a series of 12 military tribunals for war crimes against members of the leadership of Nazi Germany between December 1946 and April 1949. They followed the first and best-known Nuremberg trial before the International Military Tribunal which concluded in October 1946. In contrast, the subsequent trials were conducted before U.S. military courts rather than an international court. They are also collectively known as the Nuremberg Military Tribunals.
The Pohl trial against the Nazi German administration of the "Final Solution" was the fourth of the thirteen trials for war crimes that the United States authorities held in their occupation zone in Germany in Nuremberg after the end of World War II. The thirteen trials were all held before U.S. military courts, not before the International Military Tribunal, although both courts presided in the same rooms at the Palace of Justice. They are known collectively as the "Subsequent Nuremberg Trials" or more formally, as the "Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals" (NMT).
The United States of America vs. Friedrich Flick, et al. or Flick trial was the fifth of twelve Nazi war crimes trials held by United States authorities in their occupation zone in Germany (Nuremberg) after World War II. It was the first of three trials of leading industrialists of Nazi Germany; the two others were the IG Farben Trial and the Krupp Trial.
The United States of America vs. Carl Krauch, et al., also known as the IG Farben Trial, was the sixth of the twelve trials for war crimes the U.S. authorities held in their occupation zone in Germany (Nuremberg) after the end of World War II. IG Farben was the private German chemicals company allied with the Nazis that manufactured the Zyklon B gas used to commit genocide against millions of European Jews in the Holocaust.
The Einsatzgruppen trial was the ninth of the twelve trials for war crimes and crimes against humanity that the US authorities held in their occupation zone in Germany in Nuremberg after the end of World War II. These twelve trials were all held before US military courts, not before the International Military Tribunal. They took place in the same rooms at the Palace of Justice. The twelve US trials are collectively known as the "Subsequent Nuremberg trials" or, more formally, as the "Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals" (NMT).
The Hostages Trial was held from 8 July 1947 until 19 February 1948 and was the seventh of the twelve trials for war crimes that United States authorities held in their occupation zone in Germany in Nuremberg after the end of World War II. These twelve trials were all held before US military courts, not before the International Military Tribunal, but took place in the same rooms at the Palace of Justice. The twelve US trials are collectively known as the "Subsequent Nuremberg Trials" or, more formally, as the "Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals" (NMT).
The High Command Trial, also known initially as Case No. 12, and later as Case No. 72, was the last of the twelve trials for war crimes the U.S. authorities held in their occupation zone of Germany in Nuremberg after the end of World War II. These twelve trials were all held before U.S. military courts, not before the International Military Tribunal, but took place in the same rooms at the Palace of Justice. The twelve U.S. trials are collectively known as the "subsequent Nuremberg trials" or, more formally, as the "Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals" (NMT).
The Ministries Trial was the eleventh of the twelve trials for war crimes the U.S. authorities held in their occupation zone in Germany in Nuremberg after the end of World War II. These twelve trials were all held before U.S. military courts, not before the International Military Tribunal, but took place in the same rooms at the Palace of Justice. The twelve U.S. trials are collectively known as the "Subsequent Nuremberg Trials" or, more formally, as the "Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals" (NMT).
Benjamin Berell Ferencz is an American lawyer. He was an investigator of Nazi war crimes after World War II and the chief prosecutor for the United States Army at the Einsatzgruppen Trial, one of the 12 Subsequent Nuremberg Trials held by the U.S. authorities at Nuremberg, Germany. Later, he became an advocate of international rule of law and for the establishment of an International Criminal Court. From 1985 to 1996, he was adjunct professor of international law at Pace University.
A crime of aggression or crime against peace is the planning, initiation, or execution of a large-scale and serious act of aggression using state military force. The definition and scope of the crime is controversial. The Rome Statute contains an exhaustive list of acts of aggression that can give rise to individual criminal responsibility, which include invasion, military occupation, annexation by the use of force, bombardment, and military blockade of ports. Aggression is generally a leadership crime that can only be committed by those with the power to shape a state's policy of aggression, rather than those who carry it out.
The governments of the German Empire and Nazi Germany ordered, organized and condoned a substantial number of war crimes, first in the Herero and Namaqua genocide and then in the First and Second World Wars. The most notable of these is the Holocaust in which millions of Jews and Romani were systematically murdered. Millions of civilians and prisoners of war also died as a result of German abuse, mistreatment, and deliberate starvation policies in those two conflicts. Much of the evidence was deliberately destroyed by the perpetrators, such as in Sonderaktion 1005, in an attempt to conceal the crimes.
Superior orders, also known as the Nuremberg defense or just following orders, is a plea in a court of law that a person, whether a member of the military, law enforcement, a firefighting force, or the civilian population, should not be considered guilty of committing actions that were ordered by a superior officer or official.
The following is a bibliography of works devoted to the Nuremberg Trials.