Legions, legions. Here’s the Tory’s Latvian chum from back in October:
Thousands of Latvians were conscripted by both Nazi Germany and the Soviets, under threat of imprisonment or death, to fight in the second world war. Members of the Latvian Legion, though carrying the German-imposed designation "SS", served as combat soldiers and were exonerated by the Nuremberg trials.
That bit about "under threat of imprisonment or death" isn’t really true: the alternatives were service with the Wehrmacht as hilfswillige or labour service in Germany: not a particularly pleasant set of choices, but choices nonetheless.
Anyway, today we read this:
Demjanjuk's lawyer, Ulrich Busch, immediately submitted an appeal to the judge to abandon the trial on the grounds that his client had "been a victim". He listed a string of more senior camp guards, some of them members of the SS, who had been tried for their roles in the Sobibor death camp in Nazi-occupied Poland but had either received minimal sentences or been exonerated of any wrongdoing.
How, Busch asked, was it possible that Demjanjuk, a "subordinate" to those men, who had been forced to work at the camp as a Nazi prisoner of war, was standing trial? "He is as much as victim as those people who were imprisoned in the camp but he is being treated as if he was a mass murderer, when in fact he didn't even have any choice whether he was there or not." His statement brought gasps from the public gallery.
Demjanjuk was originally a soldier with the Red army and became a Trawniki - a member of the local security forces employed in nazi occupied Eastern Europe - after he was captured by the Germans. Around two thirds of all Soviet Soldiers captured by the Germans in the first year of the war died, most from starvation. So the compulsion argument is probably stronger in Demjanjuk's case than in that of the Latvian Legion at least up to the point where he decided to collaborate. After that I suppose it's a matter of extending it to override what he actually did.
Well, "only obeying orders" seems to be a fashionable argument once again so I guess it's worth a try.
Recent Comments