“[F]rom the first Nuremberg trials to the hunt for war criminals in Europe, Latin America, the United States, and the Middle East…the Nazi hunters have focused most of their efforts on initiating legal proceedings against their prey…Even when justice was so obviously falling short, with the guilty often getting away with the mildest punishments or in many cases not facing any sanctions at all, the other goal that began to emerge was education by example. Why pursue an aging camp guard during his final days? Why not let the perpetrators quietly fade away…? The point of the lessons: to demonstrate that the horrendous crimes of World War II and the Holocaust cannot and should not be forgotten, and that those who instigated or carried out those crimes – or others who may carry out similar crimes in the future – are never beyond the law…”
- Andrew Nagorski, The Nazi Hunters
If you want a sense of justice, do not turn your eyes to the Second World War. Everywhere you look, in every corner, there is another crime. While the victorious Allies famously attempted to prosecute a selection of major war criminals – efforts that have been sneered at as “Victor’s Justice” ever since – the discomforting fact remains: most of the men and women who perpetrated the Holocaust got away clean, returned to society, and lived the long lives they denied to others.
When I picked up Andrew Nagorski’s The Nazi Hunters, I did so hoping to feel a little better about things.
***
If we’re being honest, I was also hoping for a bit of excitement. Pretty much all I know about Nazi hunting comes from media such as The Odessa File, The Boys from Brazil, and Marathon Man. As it turns out, with a few exceptions, the reality is far more mundane. Less chases through steamy South American jungles, and more poking through forgotten historical files. The truth is more prosaic, but no less fascinating than fiction.
There is some cloak-and-dagger stuff (the Mossad capture of Eichmann is an obvious example), but mostly this is a book about dogged researchers, prosecutors, and judges, who worked to bring criminals before the law long after the rest of the world began moving on. Their purpose was not simply punishing the wicked, but safeguarding the historical record.
***
Nagorski begins, grimly enough, at the end of Nuremberg Tribunal, with the execution of the major war criminals of Nazi Germany. One by one, he observes as Master Sergeant John Wood hanged – often poorly – ten leading Nazis. In avoiding any discussion of the International Military Tribunal itself, and focusing only on the neck-breaking climax, Nagorski is making a distinct point. The Third Reich caused more damage than any other regime in history. They killed 20 million Soviets and 6 million Jews and started a war that killed as many as 50 million in total and nearly knocked the world off its orbit. It took far, far more than the 24 men tried at Nuremberg to cause this calamity.
Calling those other perpetrators to account is the heart of The Nazi Hunters. That the men and women devoted to tracking down escaped Nazis managed to secure only a fraction of the culpable is its melancholy conclusion.
***
Some of the characters Nagorski profiles are widely known. Simon Wiesenthal figures largely, which is no surprise. An Austrian Jew, Wiesenthal survived the Nazi camps to devote his life to tracking escaped Nazis. He also did an admirable job promoting his own work, which led to more than a little friction, as well as historical distortion, which Nagorski dutifully sorts through.
Also prominent is the husband-and-wife team of Beate and Serge Klarsfeld, Nazi hunters and activists who used bold tactics (Beate once slapped West German Chancellor Kurt Kiesinger) to draw attention to their cause. Their work led to the indictment of Klaus Barbie, the infamous Butcher of Lyon. (They also worked, as Nagorski notes, hand in glove with the East German Stasi, who were quite willing to cooperate with the Klarsfelds if it meant embarrassing their western counterpart).
Nagorski also devotes substantial time to the lesser-known hunters, whose concrete deeds often exceeded those of their more-famous fellow travelers. Early in the book, Nagorski spends a lot of time with the trials that followed the echo of Nuremberg. In doing so, he introduces us to the young American prosecutors Benjamin Ferencz and William Denson. Ferencz prosecuted 22 members of the Einsatzgruppen, the SS’s mobile death squads, while Denson served as prosecuting attorney for the Dachau trials. His most famous target was Ilse Koch, the notorious “Bitch of Buchenwald” who allegedly – but probably didn't – have a lampshade made of human skin.
One of the major figures in The Nazi Hunters is German judge and prosecutor Fritz Bauer who kept the Holocaust alive in Germany by holding the Frankfurt Auschwitz trials in 1963. He also relayed important intelligence regarding Eichmann to Mossad.
***
The Nazi Hunters has no central narrative. Rather, it is arranged thematically and by subject. Some themes and subjects are more gripping than others. My attention sort of wandered when Nagorski covered Eli Rosenbaum and the U.S. Justice Department’s Office of Special Investigations, which very belatedly got around to expelling Nazi war criminals enjoying the fruits of American postwar prosperity. The expulsion of nonagenarian ex-camp guards is not as immediate and vivid as calling Eichmann or Barbie to account for their deeds. On the other hand, I found his chapter on Polish Judge Jan Sehn, who handled the case of onetime Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höss, to be absolutely essential reading. In getting Höss to write out his “memoirs,” Sehn fired an invaluable early shot across the bow of Holocaust deniers.
***
The Nazi Hunters is not a top shelf World War II book. I wasn’t blown away by the writing or narrative verve (though Nagorski certainly seems to have done his research). For whatever reason, though, this struck a chord, mainly because historical memory is so fickle and fluid.
The end of the Holocaust is going to be eighty soon. All the top brass, the officers and decision-makers of that era, are dead. Some, like Eichmann, reaped the whirlwind they had sown. Others, like Speer, glib-talked his way out of the noose, served just twenty years in prison, wrote some bestselling books, and spent the rest of his life trying to convince the world he was a “good Nazi.” Now, even the youngest surviving participants – say, a seventeen year-old camp guard – are very old men. There is little work left for the Nazi hunters. Time, as always, has the final say.
So what happens to the Holocaust as it passes out of human memory? I think quasi-historians like David Irving represent the shuddery new world of Holocaust studies. As the last survivors pass, you will see a concerted effort to revise the Third Reich and normalize Hitler. Right now, in the United States, people are Sieg Heil-ing loudly and proudly, and putting pictures of themselves doing it up on Twitter. It’s pretty remarkable for people to openly tie themselves to one of the greatest criminals in the long sad history of the world. Of course, that is the state of things right now, when we can’t even agree that Hitler was the worst.
The Nazi hunters did their bit. They chased down the rats they could; they made life uncomfortable for the ones they could not; and they kept up the steady drumbeat of remembrance. It will be up to time to tell us whether their work will live on as legacy.