Eisenhower’s Death Camps
Eisenhower’s Death Camps
World War II is often
referred to as the “Good War,” a morally clear-cut conflict between good and
evil.1 The “Good War” is also claimed to have led to a good peace. After a
period of adjustment, the United States generously adopted the Marshall Plan
and put Germany back on her feet. Germany with the help of the Allies soon
became a prosperous democracy which took her place among the family of good
nations.
The above misleading
description does not reflect the horrific treatment of Germans after the end of
the Second World War. In this chapter we will examine the mass murder of
captured German soldiers in the Allied prisoner of war camps.
Introduction to the U.S.
& French Prisoner of War Camps
On July 27, 1929, the Allies
extended the Protective Regulations of the Geneva Convention for Wounded
Soldiers to include prisoners of war (POWs). These regulations state: “All
accommodations should be equal to the standard of their troops. The Red Cross
supervises. After the end of the hostilities the POWs should be released
immediately.” On March 10, 1945, Dwight Eisenhower, the Supreme Allied
Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force, disregarded these regulations by
classifying German prisoners captured on German territory as “Disarmed Enemy
Forces” (DEFs). The German prisoners were therefore at the mercy of the Allies
and were not protected by international law.2
The Western Allies
deliberately murdered approximately 1 million disarmed German POWs by means of
starvation, exposure, and illness. This Allied atrocity was first publicly
exposed in 1989 in the book Other Losses by James Bacque. Dr.
Ernest F. Fisher, Jr., a retired colonel in the U.S. Army and a distinguished
army historian, wrote the Foreword to the updated version of Other
Losses. I quote Dr. Fisher’s Foreword from Other Losses in
its entirety:
Over most of the Western
Front in late April 1945, the thunder of artillery had been replaced by the
shuffling of millions of pairs of boots as columns of disarmed German soldiers
marched wearily towards Allied barbed wire enclosures. Scattered enemy
detachments fired a few volleys before fading into the countryside and eventual
capture by Allied soldiers.
The mass surrenders in the
west contrasted markedly with the final weeks on the Eastern Front where
surviving Wehrmacht units still fought the advancing Red Army to enable as many
of their comrades as possible to evade capture by the Russians.
This was the final strategy
of the German High Command then under Grand Admiral Doenitz who had been
designated Commander-in-Chief by Adolf Hitler following Reich Marshall
Goering’s surrender to the west.
From the German point of
view, this strategy delivered millions of German soldiers to what they believed
would be the more merciful hands of the Western Allies under supreme military
commander General Dwight Eisenhower. However, given General Eisenhower’s fierce
and obsessive hatred not only of the Nazi regime, but indeed of all things
German, this belief was at best a desperate gamble. More than 5 million German
soldiers in the American and French zones were crowded into barbed wire cages,
many of them literally shoulder to shoulder. The ground beneath soon became a
quagmire of filth and disease. Open to the weather, lacking even primitive
sanitary facilities, underfed, the prisoners soon began dying of starvation and
disease. Starting in April 1945, the United States Army and the French army
casually annihilated about 1 million men, most of them in American camps. Not
since the horrors of the Confederate-administered prison at Andersonville
during the American Civil War had such cruelties taken place under American
military control. For more than four decades this unprecedented tragedy lay
hidden in Allied archives.
How at last did this
enormous war crime come to light? The first clues were uncovered in 1986 by the
author James Bacque and his assistant. Researching a book about Raoul
Laporterie, a French Resistance hero who had saved about 1,600 refugees from
the Nazis, they interviewed a former German soldier who had become a friend of
Laporterie in 1946. Laporterie had taken this man, Hans Goertz, and one other,
out of a French prison camp in 1946 to give them work as tailors in his chain
of stores. Goertz declared that “Laporterie saved my life, because 25% of the
men in that camp died in one month.” What had they died of? “Starvation,
dysentery, disease.”
Checking as far as possible
the records of the camps where Goertz had been confined, Bacque found that it
had been one of a group of three in a system of 1,600, all equally bad,
according to ICRC reports in the French army archives at Vincennes, Paris. Soon
they came upon the first hard evidence of mass deaths in U.S.-controlled camps.
This evidence was found in army reports under the bland heading Other Losses.
The terrible significance of this term was soon explained to Bacque and me by
Colonel Philip S. Lauben, a former chief of the Germany Affairs Branch of
SHAEF.
In the spring of 1987, Mr.
Bacque and I met in Washington. Over the following months, we worked together
in the National Archives and in the George C. Marshall Foundation in Lexington,
Virginia, piecing together the evidence we uncovered. The plans made at the
highest levels of the U.S. and British governments in 1944 expressed a
determination to destroy Germany as a world power once and for all by reducing
her to a peasant economy, although this would mean the starvation of millions
of civilians. Up until now, historians have agreed that the Allied leaders soon
canceled their destructive plans because of public resistance.
Eisenhower’s hatred, passed
through the lens of a compliant military bureaucracy, produced the horror of
death camps unequaled by anything in American military history. In the face of
the catastrophic consequences of this hatred, the casual indifference expressed
by the SHAEF officers is the most painful aspect of the U.S. Army’s
involvement.
Nothing was further from the
intent of the great majority of Americans in 1945 than to kill off so many
unarmed Germans after the war. Some idea of the magnitude of this horror can be
gained when it is realized that these deaths exceed by far all those incurred
by the German army in the west between June 1941 and April 1945. In the
narrative that follows, the veil is drawn from this tragedy.3
Col. Fisher sat on a U.S.
Army commission investigating allegations of war crimes committed by American
soldiers in 1945. He later said that the commission was “a whitewash.”4
After conducting his
research in France, James Bacque realized that a catastrophe had occurred in
the American and French POW camps. In the United States National Archives on
Pennsylvania Avenue, Bacque found the documents with the heading Weekly
Prisoner of War and Disarmed Enemy Forces Report. In each report was the
heading Other Losses, which paralleled the statistics he had seen in France.
Bacque reviewed these
reports with Col. Philip S. Lauben, who had been chief of the German Affairs
Branch of Supreme Headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF) in charge of
prisoner transfers and repatriation. Bacque and Lauben went over the headings
in the reports one by one until they got to the heading Other Losses. Lauben
said, “It means deaths and escapes.” When Bacque asked how many escapes, Lauben
answered “Very, very minor.” Bacque later learned that the escapes were less
than one-tenth of 1%.5
Bacque states that because
some prisoner documents were deceptive when made, and because many records were
destroyed in the 1950s or hidden in euphemisms, the number of dead will always
be in dispute. However, there is no question that enormous numbers of men of
all ages, plus some women and children, died of starvation, exposure,
unsanitary conditions, and disease in American and French POW camps in Germany
and France starting in April 1945.
Bacque estimates in Other
Losses that the victims undoubtedly number over 790,000, almost
certainly over 900,000, and quite likely over a million. The prisoners’ deaths
were knowingly caused by army officers who had sufficient resources to keep
these prisoners alive. Relief organizations such as the Red Cross that
attempted to help prisoners in the American camps were refused permission by
the army.6
U.S. Witnesses to AMERICAN
& French Prisoner of War Camps
Some American guards have
published accounts of their experiences at the Allied POW camps. One of the
most credible and informative is that of Martin Brech. The following is the
major portion of his account:
In October, 1944, at age 18,
I was drafted into the U.S. Army. . . . In late March or early April, 1945, I
was sent to guard a POW camp near Andernach along the Rhine. I had four years
of high school German, so I was able to talk to the prisoners, although this
was forbidden. Gradually, however, I was used as an interpreter and asked to
ferret out members of the S.S. (I found none).
In Andernach about 50,000
prisoners of all ages were held in an open field surrounded by barbed wire. The
women were kept in a separate enclosure I did not see until later. The men I
guarded had no shelter and no blankets; many had no coats. They slept in the
mud, wet and cold, with inadequate slit trenches for excrement. It was a cold,
wet spring and their misery from exposure alone was evident.
Even more shocking was to
see the prisoners throwing grass and weeds into a tin can containing a thin
soup. They told me they did this to help ease their hunger pains. Quickly, they
grew emaciated. Dysentery raged, and soon they were sleeping in their own
excrement, too weak and crowded to reach the slit trenches. Many were begging
for food, sickening and dying before our eyes. We had ample food and supplies,
but did nothing to help them, including no medical assistance.
Outraged, I protested to my
officers and was met with hostility or bland indifference. When pressed, they
explained they were under strict orders from “higher up.” No officer would dare
do this to 50,000 men if he felt that it was “out of line,” leaving him open to
charges. Realizing my protests were useless, I asked a friend working in the
kitchen if he could slip me some extra food for the prisoners. He too said they
were under strict orders to severely ration the prisoners’ food and that these
orders came from “higher up.” But he said they had more food than they knew
what to do with and would sneak me some.
When I threw this food over
the barbed wire to the prisoners, I was caught and threatened with
imprisonment. I repeated the “offense,” and one officer angrily threatened to
shoot me. I assumed this was a bluff until I encountered a captain on the hill
above the Rhine shooting down at a group of German civilian women with his .45
caliber pistol. When I asked, “Why?” he mumbled, “Target practice,” and fired
until his pistol was empty. I saw the women running for cover, but, at that
distance, couldn’t tell if any had been hit.
This is when I realized I
was dealing with cold-blooded killers filled with moralistic hatred. They
considered the Germans subhuman and worthy of extermination; another expression
of the downward spiral of racism. Articles in the G.I. newspaper, Stars
and Stripes, played up the German concentration camps, complete with photos
of emaciated bodies; this amplified our self-righteous cruelty and made it
easier to imitate behavior we were supposed to oppose. Also, I think, soldiers
not exposed to combat were trying to prove how tough they were by taking it out
on the prisoners and civilians.
These prisoners, I found
out, were mostly farmers and workingmen, as simple and ignorant as many of our
own troops. As time went on, more of them lapsed into a zombie-like state of listlessness,
while others tried to escape in a demented or suicidal fashion, running through
open fields in broad daylight towards the Rhine to quench their thirst. They
were mowed down.
Some prisoners were as eager
for cigarettes as for food, saying they took the edge off their hunger.
Accordingly, enterprising G.I. “Yankee traders” were acquiring hordes of
watches and rings in exchange for handfuls of cigarettes or less. When I began
throwing cartons of cigarettes to the prisoners to ruin this trade, I was
threatened by rank-and-file G.I.s too.
The only bright spot in this
gloomy picture came one night when I was put on the “graveyard shift,” from two
to four A.M. Actually, there was a graveyard on the uphill side of this
enclosure, not many yards away. My superiors had forgotten to give me a
flashlight and I hadn’t bothered to ask for one, disgusted as I was with the
whole situation by that time. It was a fairly bright night and I soon became
aware of a prisoner crawling under the wires towards the graveyard. We were
supposed to shoot escapees on sight, so I started to get up from the ground to
warn him to get back. Suddenly I noticed another prisoner crawling from the
graveyard back to the enclosure. They were risking their lives to get to the
graveyard for something; I had to investigate.
When I entered the gloom of
this shrubby, tree-shaded cemetery, I felt completely vulnerable, but somehow
curiosity kept me moving. Despite my caution, I tripped over the legs of
someone in a prone position. Whipping my rifle around while stumbling and
trying to regain composure of mind and body, I soon was relieved I hadn’t
reflexively fired. The figure sat up. Gradually, I could see the beautiful but
terror-stricken face of a woman with a picnic basket nearby. German civilians
were not allowed to feed, nor even come near the prisoners, so I quickly
assured her I approved of what she was doing, not to be afraid, and that I
would leave the graveyard to get out of the way.
I did so immediately and sat
down, leaning against a tree at the edge of the cemetery to be inconspicuous
and not frighten the prisoners. I imagined then, and still do now, what it
would be like to meet a beautiful woman with a picnic basket, under those
conditions as a prisoner. I have never forgotten her face.
Eventually, more prisoners
crawled back to the enclosure. I saw they were dragging food to their comrades
and could only admire their courage and devotion.
On May 8, V.E. Day, I
decided to celebrate with some prisoners I was guarding who were baking bread
the other prisoners occasionally received. This group had all the bread they
could eat, and shared the jovial mood generated by the end of the war. We all
thought we were going home soon, a pathetic hope on their part. We were in what
was to become the French zone, where I soon would witness the brutality of the
French soldiers when we transferred our prisoners to them for their slave labor
camps.
On this day, however, we
were happy.
As a gesture of
friendliness, I emptied my rifle and stood it in the corner, even allowing them
to play with it at their request. This thoroughly “broke the ice,” and soon we
were singing songs we taught each other or I had learned in high school German
(“Du, du liegst mir im Herzen”). Out of gratitude, they baked me a special
small loaf of sweet bread, the only possible present they had left to offer. I
stuffed it in my “Eisenhower jacket” and snuck it back to my barracks, eating
it when I had privacy. I have never tasted more delicious bread, nor felt a
deeper sense of communion while eating it. I believe a cosmic sense of Christ
(the Oneness of all Being) revealed its normally hidden presence to me on that
occasion, influencing my later decision to major in philosophy and religion.
Shortly afterwards, some of
our weak and sickly prisoners were marched off by French soldiers to their
camp. We were riding on a truck behind this column. Temporarily, it slowed down
and dropped back, perhaps because the driver was as shocked as I was. Whenever
a German prisoner staggered or dropped back, he was hit on the head with a club
until he died. The bodies were rolled to the side of the road to be picked up
by another truck. For many, this quick death might have been preferable to slow
starvation in our “killing fields.”
When I finally saw the
German women in a separate enclosure, I asked why we were holding them
prisoner. I was told they were “camp followers,” selected as breeding stock for
the S.S. to create a super-race. I spoke to some and must say I never met a
more spirited or attractive group of women. I certainly didn’t think they
deserved imprisonment.
I was used increasingly as
an interpreter, and was able to prevent some particularly unfortunate arrests.
One rather amusing incident involved an old farmer who was being dragged away
by several M.P.s. I was told he had a “fancy Nazi medal,” which they showed me.
Fortunately, I had a chart identifying such medals. He’d been awarded it for
having five children! Perhaps his wife was somewhat relieved to get him “off
her back,” but I didn’t think one of our death camps was a fair punishment for
his contribution to Germany. The M.P.s agreed and released him to continue his
“dirty work.”
Famine began to spread among
the German civilians also. It was a common sight to see German women up to
their elbows in our garbage cans looking for something edible—that is, if they
weren’t chased away.
When I interviewed mayors of
small towns and villages, I was told their supply of food had been taken away
by “displaced persons” (foreigners who had worked in Germany), who packed the
food on trucks and drove away. When I reported this, the response was a shrug.
I never saw any Red Cross at the camp or helping civilians, although their
coffee and doughnut stands were available everywhere else for us. In the
meantime, the Germans had to rely on the sharing of hidden stores until the
next harvest.
Hunger made German women
more “available,” but despite this, rape was prevalent and often accompanied by
additional violence. In particular I remember an eighteen-year-old woman who
had the side of her face smashed with a rifle butt and was then raped by two
G.I.s. Even the French complained that the rapes, looting and drunken
destructiveness on the part of our troops was excessive. In Le Havre, we’d been
given booklets warning us that the German soldiers had maintained a high
standard of behavior with French civilians who were peaceful, and that we
should do the same. In this we failed miserably.
“So what?” some would say.
“The enemy’s atrocities were worse than ours.” It is true that I experienced
only the end of the war, when we were already the victors. The German
opportunity for atrocities had faded; ours was at hand. But two wrongs don’t
make a right. Rather than copying our enemy’s crimes, we should aim once and
for all to break the cycle of hatred and vengeance that has plagued and
distorted human history. This is why I am speaking out now, forty-five years
after the crime. We can never prevent individual war crimes, but we can, if
enough of us speak out, influence government policy. We can reject government
propaganda that depicts our enemies as subhuman and encourages the kind of
outrages I witnessed. We can protest the bombing of civilian targets, which
still goes on today. And we can refuse ever to condone our government’s murder
of unarmed and defeated prisoners of war.
I realize it is difficult
for the average citizen to admit witnessing a crime of this magnitude,
especially if implicated himself. Even G.I.s sympathetic to the victims were
afraid to complain and get into trouble, they told me. And the danger has not
ceased. Since I spoke out a few weeks ago, I have received threatening calls
and had my mailbox smashed. But it’s been worth it. Writing about these
atrocities has been a catharsis of feeling suppressed too long, a liberation,
and perhaps will remind other witnesses that “the truth will make us free, have
no fear.” We may even learn a supreme lesson from all this: only love can
conquer all.7
Martin Brech saw bodies go
out of the camp by the truckload, but he was never told how many there were, or
where and how they were buried.8 Brech said in 1995 regarding the U.S.
Army, “It is clear that in fact it was the policy to shoot any civilians trying
to feed the prisoners.” Brech has also confirmed that Eisenhower’s starvation
policy was harshly enforced down to the lowest level of camp guard.9
Many other U.S. Army
officers and NCOs have admitted that the conditions in the Allied POW camps
were lethal for the Germans. Cpl. Daniel McConnell suffered from post-traumatic
stress disorder caused by his experiences in a U.S. Army camp at Heilbronn.
McConnell had been ordered, despite his ignorance of medicine, to take over
Baker # 4, a “hospital” tent at Heilbronn. McConnell writes: “One day while
working on a coal detail, I was summoned to the office of the First Sergeant
who said, ‘We see from your 201 file you know some German—the guy out in the
prison camp is messing up. We’re sending you out to straighten things out.’ ”
The hospital had no medical
facilities beyond bottles of aspirin. McConnell writes: “After a tour of
inspection, I saw that Baker #4 was a hospital in name only. Not even the most
elementary standards of cleanliness were maintained or enforceable. Cleaning
compounds and disinfectants were unavailable, not to mention medical and
surgical [supplies]. . . . The odor was unendurable. . . . Operations were
performed without anesthesia. . . . At night the chatter of a machine gun or
the crack of a rifle could be heard as a POW went for the wire to escape.”10
The mud-floored tent was
simply a way to assemble dying prisoners convenient to the trucks that would
soon take away their corpses. McConnell saw the prisoners die en
masse in this camp, and saw the prisoners buried by bulldozers in mass
graves. McConnell states: “When a POW died, his remains were taken in a gunny
sack to a tent near the main gate. There a medical officer would sign a death
certificate, which I would witness. A number of bodies would be taken to a long
slit trench outside the camp for mass burial. If next of kin were present (a
rare event), a few words were spoken by a clergyman, then a bulldozer would
start up and cover the bodies with earth.”
Since McConnell was ordered
to supervise all of this without being able to stop it, his guilt never left
him. After 50 years McConnell’s mental condition eventually made him physically
ill. The Veterans’ Administration, which in 1998 awarded McConnell a 100%
medical pension, admitted that McConnell had been injured for life by the
horrors he had witnessed in the camp but could not prevent.11
Probably the most eminent of
the American eyewitnesses to the camps is Maj. Gen. Richard Steinbach (then a
colonel), who was ordered to take over administration of several U.S. Army
prison camps near Heilbronn. In his memoirs, Steinbach says that on an
inspection tour he found that the conditions in the American camps were
terrible. The great majority of the prisoners had no shelter. Most of the
prisoners had lost weight, some were suffering from illness, and some were
slowly losing their minds. Often far less than the official food allotment of
1,000 calories per day was given to the prisoners, even though Steinbach soon
found that sufficient food was available.12
Steinbach knew what had
caused the terrible conditions in the American POW camps: “This was caused by
the Morgenthau Plan. . . . Morgenthau was venting his pent-up feelings on
Germany by starving these men. . . . [His] objective was vengeance rather than
promoting U.S. national objectives. Of course, Franklin D. Roosevelt, the
president who approved this plan, was also responsible. Worse even than the
starvation was the idleness enforced on these people. I was amazed and
disgusted at the same time. Was this the American way to treat people, even
though some might be criminals? Obviously it was not. I directed the U.S. camp
commander to send to the railhead and draw supplementary rations.” Steinbach
said that the food and tents were delivered immediately from supplies nearby.13
Gen. Withers Alexander
Burress, like Steinbach a member of the Sixth Army command, found the same
conditions in his camps. Steinbach says he saw the same things elsewhere: “I
inspected other camps and found the same situation, ordering the same remedial
action. . . . As soon as I returned to our headquarters, I met with General
Burress. He said that the German POW camp was something beyond his
comprehension.” Unfortunately, Steinbach was transferred early the next year,
and conditions at Heilbronn deteriorated again according to Cpl. Daniel
McConnell.14
American prison camps in
France were also kept far below the standards set by the Geneva Convention. Lt.
Col. Henry W. Allard, who was in charge of some camps in France from late 1944
through May 1945, says that only food rations were sent to the camps. Supplies
such as medicine, clothing, fuel, mess kits, and stoves were denied to the
prisoners. Allard describes the camps conditions: “The standards of PW
[prisoner of war] camps in the ComZ [the U.S. Army’s rear zone] in Europe
compare as only slightly better or even with the living conditions of the
Japanese PW camps our men tell us about, and unfavorably with those of the
Germans.”15
After the war conditions in
the American camps grew steadily worse. Col. Philip Lauben later said that the
American and French camps in the Vosges region in France were so bad that “the
Vosges was just one big death camp.”16
Disastrous overcrowding,
disease, exposure and malnutrition were the rule in the U.S. camps in Germany
beginning in 1945. U.S. Army Cols. James B. Mason and Charles H. Beasley
observed the conditions in the American camps along the Rhine in April 1945:
April 20 was a blustery day
with alternate rain, sleet and snow and with bone-chilling winds sweeping down
the Rhine valley from the north over the flats where the enclosure was located.
Huddled close together for warmth, behind the barbed wire was a most awesome
sight—nearly 100,000 haggard, apathetic, dirty, gaunt, blank-staring men clad
in dirty field gray uniforms, and standing ankle-deep in mud. Here and there
were dirty white blurs which, upon a closer look were seen to be men with
bandaged heads or arms or standing in shirt sleeves! The German Division
Commander reported that the men had not eaten for at least two days, and the
provision of water was a major problem—yet only 200 yards away was the river
Rhine running bank-full.17
The view from inside the
camps was even worse. The inmates suffered from nagging hunger and thirst, and
large numbers died from starvation, dysentery, and exposure to the elements.
Capt. Ben H. Jackson said that when he approached one of the camps along the
Rhine: “I could smell it a mile away. It was barbaric.”18
A Jewish intelligence
lieutenant at Bad Kreuznach stated: “I’ve been interrogating German officers
for the War Crimes Commission, and when I find them half-starved to death right
in our own P.W. cages and being treated like you wouldn’t treat a dog, I ask
myself some questions. Sometimes I have to get them fed up and hospitalized
before I can get a coherent story out of them. . . . All these directives about
don’t coddle the Germans have thrown open the gates for every criminal tendency
we’ve got in us.”19
Gen. Mark Clark, the U.S.
political commissioner in Austria, was horrified by the conditions in the U.S.
camps when he arrived in Austria. Clark took the unusual step of writing a memo
“for files.” This was probably to exculpate himself before history without
offending his boss, Gen. Dwight Eisenhower. Clark wrote:
When I first came to Austria
from Italy, General Keyes told me of the deplorable conditions which existed in
the Ebensee Camp, mostly due to over-crowding and to lack of proper
nourishment. He told me he was taking corrective steps. . . . I sent for
Colonel Lloyd, my Inspector-General, and told him to make an inspection at this
camp. Later General Hume came in with a detailed report showing the critical
situation which exists there. I immediately directed the overcrowding be
released, and that the caloric value of the ration be increased to
approximately 2800 calories. I am not sure that I have the authority to do
this, but will do it anyway because some immediate action must be taken. What
astounds me is my lack of information on this camp from my staff officers.20
The deplorable condition of
the Austrian camps is confirmed by a special investigation held in September
1945 under the command of U.S. Lt. Col. Herbert Pollack. Pollack found
starvation conditions and severe malnutrition problems among many of the
prisoners in U.S. camps in Austria.21
U.S. Sgt. Merrill W.
Campbell writes of a mass atrocity he witnessed in southern Germany:
There [were] 10,000 or more
German prisoners in this open field, standing shoulder to shoulder. This bunch
of prisoners [was] there for three days or more with no food or water, no
shelter. There was little concern for these people. There [were] no German
civilians around. As for food and water, I personally think it could have been
provided to them. Most of the guards were very brutal. As I was not in charge
of this camp, there was little I could do. On the morning the prisoners were
moved out, my company had orders to leave and go to Garmisch as my company was
leaving the area. I looked back where they were moving the prisoners out; mud
was deep as far as I could see. Heads, arms and legs of the dead were sticking
out of the mud. It made me sick and disgusted.22
U.S. Capt. Frederick
Siegfriedt was detailed in eastern France near Zimming in December 1945, where
there were about 17,000 German prisoners. Captain L., a lifelong friend of
Siegfriedt’s, was medical officer of the detachment. Siegfriedt writes:
Captain L. had been an extremely
hard working and conscientious person all his life. It was evident that he was
under extreme stress trying to cope with the conditions at CCE 27 and receiving
no cooperation, no help, no understanding, was helpless, and had not even
anyone to talk to. I was able to serve to fill the [last] need. He explained to
me that most of the men had dysentery and were suffering from malnutrition.
Some men in the cages had as many as 17 bloody stools a day, he said. He took
me to one of the former French barracks that served as the hospital. It had
eight hundred men lying all over, on the cold concrete floors as well as the
beds. It just broke your heart to see it. . . . Almost without exception the
other [U.S.] officers were reclassified because of alcoholism or psychiatric
problems. . . . The operation of CCE 27 seemed typical of the entire system.
When an enclosure got a bunch of prisoners they didn’t know what to do with, or
could not otherwise handle, they were shipped unannounced to another enclosure.
. . . I have no idea how many died [or] where they were buried. I am sure the
Americans did not bury them and we had no such thing as a bulldozer. I can only
assume that a detail of German PWs would bury them. I could look out of the
window of my office and tell if the body being carried by was alive or dead by
whether or not there was a fifth man following with the man’s personal
possessions. The number could have been from five to twenty-five a day.23
Siegfriedt concludes that “.
. . the [American] staff was much more concerned with living the luxurious life
than it was about the operation of the prison camps.”24
An American officer, who
requested anonymity because of fear of reprisals, said: “The conditions you so
aptly described were exactly as it was in Regensburg, Moosburg and other camps
throughout lower Bavaria and Austria. Death was commonplace and savage
treatment given by the Polish guards under American officers.”25
Many German POWs
“accidentally suffocated” in Allied boxcars while being shipped. U.S. Lt.
Arthur W. von Fange saw about 12 locked boxcars filled with men stationed on a
siding near Remagen in March 1945. He heard cries from within which gradually
died down. Von Fange said, “I don’t imagine they lasted three days.”26 Several
times in March 1945, American guards opening rail cars of prisoners arriving
from Germany found the prisoners dead inside. At Mailly le Camp on March 16,
1945, 104 prisoners were found dead. A further 27 German prisoners were found
dead at Attichy.27
Soon after Germany
surrendered on May 8, 1945, Gen. Eisenhower sent an urgent courier throughout
the huge area that he commanded. The message reads in part: “The military
government has requested me to make it known, that, under no circumstances may
food supplies be assembled among the local inhabitants, in order to deliver
them to the German prisoners of war. Those who violate this command and
nevertheless try to circumvent this blockade, to allow anything to come to the
prisoners, place themselves in danger of being shot. . . .”28 Copies of
this order have been found in many towns and villages in Germany.29
An American sergeant (who
has asked to remain anonymous), saw this order to civilians posted in German
and English on the bulletin board of U.S. Army Military Government Headquarters
in Bavaria, signed by the Chief of Staff of the Military Governor of Bavaria.
The order was even posted in Polish in Straubing and Regensburg, because there
were a lot of Polish guards at those camps. The American sergeant said that it
was the intention of army command from May 1945 through the end of 1947 to
exterminate as many German POWs in the U.S. zone as the traffic would bear
without international scrutiny. This sergeant, who at the time was in Military
Intelligence in the U.S. Army of Occupation, witnessed the lethal conditions
inflicted on German prisoners at several camps, including Regensburg near
Munich.30
Oscar E. Plummer of Clinton,
Illinois writes of the lethal conditions he observed in American POW camps:
I served in the U.S. Army
during World War II, and was wounded in Belgium. I spent a lot of time in
Germany during and after the war.
Many people are reluctant to
believe that the United States could have mistreated German prisoners in the
way that James Bacque relates in his book, Other Losses. I can
attest to the fact that the U.S. Army did have those inhumane holding pens for
German prisoners: I saw them! These were guarded, fenced-in areas with
thousands of German prisoners of war inside, and there were no interior
buildings or shelters. The POWs looked very thin and drawn. This was months
after the war was over. They should have been released when the war was over.31
Additional Witnesses to the
American & French POW Camps
Many other witnesses and
government officials knew about the horrible conditions in the Allied POW
camps. In an interview conducted in June 1945 with the U.S. Army, Dr. Konrad
Adenauer deplored the U.S. death camps along the Rhine in very strong terms.
Adenauer said:
Some of the German PWs are
being held in camps in a manner contrary to all humanitarian principles and
flagrantly contrary to the Hague [and Geneva] Convention. All along the Rhine
from Remagen-Sinzig to Ludwigshafen the German prisoners have been penned up
for weeks without any protection from the weather, without drinking water,
without medical care and with only a few slices of bread to eat. They could not
even lie down on the floor [ground]. These were many hundreds of thousands. It
is said that the same is true in the interior of Germany. These people died by
the thousands. They stood day and night in wet mud up to their ankles!
Conditions have improved during the past few weeks. Of course the enormous
number of prisoners is one of the causes of these conditions but it is
noteworthy that to the best of my knowledge, it took a great many weeks to
improve at least the worst conditions. The impression made on the Germans by
the publication of facts about the concentration camps was greatly weakened by
this fact. . . . I know that in the winter of 1941-1942 the Russian prisoners
were very badly treated by the Germans and we ought to be ashamed of the fact,
but I feel that you ought not to do the same thing. German prisoners too in
camps ate grass and picked leaves from the trees because they were hungry
exactly as the Russians unfortunately did. . . .32
Dr. Adenauer’s description
of the German men who “stood day and night in wet mud up to their ankles” as
they died by the thousands is similar to the description of the prisoners in
American camps along the Rhine made in April 1945 by Cols. Beasley and Mason,
who said that the prisoners were “standing ankle-deep in mud.”
Dr. Joseph Kirsch, a French
volunteer doctor who worked in an evacuation hospital for moribund prisoners of
war, writes:
I volunteered to the
Military Government of the 21st [French] Military region [near Metz]. . . . I
was assigned to the French Military hospital at the little seminary of
Montigny. . . . In May 1945, the Americans who occupied the hospital at
Legouest brought us every night by ambulance, stretchers loaded with moribund
prisoners in German uniforms. . . . These ambulances arrived by the back door.
. . . We lined up the stretchers in central hall. For treatment, we had nothing
at our disposal. We could only perform elementary superficial examinations
(auscultation), only to find out the anticipated cause of death in the night .
. . for in the morning, more ambulances arrived with coffins and quicklime. . .
. These prisoners were in such extremely bad condition that my role was reduced
to comforting the dying. This drama has obsessed me since the war; I consider
it a horror.33
Similar to the experience of
U.S. Cpl. Daniel McConnell, Dr. Kirsch discovered that these “hospitals” were
merely places to take moribund prisoners rather than places to help the
prisoners get well.
Prisoners transferred from
the American camps to the French camps kept on starving. Journalist Jacques
Fauvet wrote in Le Monde: “As one speaks today of Dachau, in ten
years people throughout the world will speak about camps like Saint Paul
d’Eyjeaux,” where 17,000 prisoners taken over from the Americans in late July
were dying so fast that within a few weeks two cemeteries of 200 graves each
had been filled. The death rate by the end of September was 10 per day, or over
21% per year.
Fauvet challenged the
question of revenge: “People will object that the Germans weren’t very
particular on the matter of feeding our men, but even if they did violate the
Geneva Convention, that hardly seems to justify our following their example. .
. . People have often said that the best service that we could do the Germans
would be to imitate them, so they would one day find us before the judgment of
history, but it is to an ideal higher than mere dignity that France should
remain faithful; it is to be regretted that the foreign press had to remind us
of that. . . . We didn’t suffer and fight to perpetuate the crimes of other
times and places.”34
Jean-Pierre Pradervand, head
of the delegations of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in
France, went to inspect the French camp at Thorée les Pins in the late summer
of 1945. This camp was already known in the village nearby as “Buchenwald”
after the notorious German camp. Two thousand of the men at the camp were
already so far gone that nothing could save them. Twenty of the prisoners died
that day while Pradervand was there. Approximately 6,000 of the prisoners would
soon be dead unless they were immediately given food, clothing, shelter and
medical care. All of the remaining prisoners were undernourished.
Pradervand first appealed
directly to de Gaulle, who repeatedly ignored him. So Pradervand got in touch
with the ICRC in Geneva, asking for action. On Sept. 14, 1945, the ICRC in
Geneva sent a devastating document to the State Department in Washington, D.C.
based on Pradervand’s report of the conditions in the camp. The document
requested that the U.S. government take emergency measures to supply the
prisoners with food, medications, clothing, boots, blankets, and soap. The ICRC
recommended that the United States increase rations in American camps in Europe
to obviate the prolonged undernourishment of the German prisoners.35
Henry W. Dunning, who was in
the prisoner of war department of the American Red Cross, also wrote on Sept.
5, 1945, to the American Red Cross headquarters in Washington, D.C. Dunning
stated:
[T]he situation of the
German prisoners of war in France has become desperate and shortly will become
an open scandal. During the past week several Frenchmen, who were formerly
prisoners of the Germans, have called on me to protest the treatment being
given German prisoners of war by the French Government. General Thrasher Commanding
the Oise Intermediary sector, asked one of our field workers to come to Paris
to see me about the same matter. Mrs. Dunning, returning from Bourges, reports
that dozens of German prisoners are dying there weekly. I saw Pradervand who
told me that the situation of German prisoners in France in many instances is
worse than in the former German concentration camps. He showed me photographs
of human skeletons and letters from French camp commanders who have asked to be
relieved because they can get no help from the French government and cannot
stand to see the prisoners dying from lack of food. Pradervand has appealed to
everyone in the French government but to no avail.36
The French newspaper Le
Figaro reported the horrific conditions of the prisoner camps in
September 1945. The newspaper had been convinced by the testimony of impeccable
witnesses, such as a priest, Father Le Meur, who had actually seen the
prisoners starving in the camps. Le Figaro’s reporter, Serge
Bromberger, wrote: “The most serious source confirmed that the physical state
of the prisoners was worse than deplorable. People were talking a horrifying
death rate, not from sickness but starvation, and of men who weighed an average
35-45 kilos [80-100 pounds]. At first we doubted the truth of all this, but
appeals came to us from many sources and we could not disregard the testimony
of Father Le Meur, Assistant General Chaplain to the prisoners.”
Le Figaro interviewed French Gen. Louis Buisson, the head
of the Prisoner of War Service, who admitted that the prisoners got only 900 to
1,000 calories per day. Buisson said, “The doctors told us that this was just
enough for a man lying in bed never moving not to die too quickly.”37
Louis Clair wrote in The
Progressive of the horrible conditions in the French camps of German
POWs. He reported:
In a camp in the Sarthe
district for 20,000 prisoners, inmates receive 900 calories a day; thus 12 die
every day in the hospital. Four to five thousand are unable to work at all
anymore. Recently trains with new prisoners arrived in the camp: several
prisoners had died during the trip, several others had tried to stay alive by
eating coal that had been lying in the freight train by which they came.
In an Orleans camp, the
commander received 16 francs a day per head or prisoner to buy food, but he
spent only nine francs, so that the prisoners were starving. In the Charentes
district, 2,500 of the 12,000 camp inmates are sick. A young French soldier
writes to a friend just returned from a Nazi camp: “I watch those who made you
suffer so much, dying of hunger, sleeping on cold cement floors, in no way
protected from rain and wind. I see kids of 19, who beg me to give them
certificates that they are healthy enough to join the French Foreign Legion. .
. . Yes, I who hated them so much, today can only feel pity for them.”
A witness reports on the
camp in Langres: “I have seen them beaten with rifle butts and kicked with feet
in the streets of the town because they broke down of overwork. Two or three of
them die of exhaustion every week.”
In another camp near
Langres, 700 prisoners slowly die of hunger; they have hardly any blankets and
not enough straw to sleep on; there is a typhoid epidemic in the camp which has
already spread to the neighboring village. In another camp prisoners receive
only one meal a day but are expected to continue working. Elsewhere so many
have died recently that the cemetery space was exhausted and another cemetery
had to be built.
In a camp where prisoners
work on the removal of mines, regular food supplies arrive only every second
day so that “prisoners make themselves a soup of grass and some stolen
vegetables.” All prisoners of this camp have contracted tuberculosis. Here and
elsewhere treatment differs in no respect from the Nazi SS brutality. Many
cases have been reported where men have been so horribly beaten that their
limbs were broken. In one camp, men were awakened during the night, crawled out
of their barracks and then shot “because of attempted escape.”
There are written affidavits
proving that in certain camps commanding officers sold on the black market all
the supplies that had been provided by American Army authorities; there are
other affidavits stating that the prisoners were forced to take off their shoes
and run the gauntlet. And so on, and so on. . . These are the facts.38
The ICRC inspecting the
French camps in 1945 and 1946 reported time after time that conditions were
“unsatisfactory,” “disturbing,” “alarming,” but very seldom that they were satisfactory.
At the end of October 1946, the ICRC stated that “the situation at present is
more than alarming. More than half the German POWs working are insufficiently
clad and will not be able to stand up to the rigors of winter without running
the gravest risks of disease. In such conditions a high number of deaths in the
course of winter must be expected.” The same dire warnings were repeated in a
report by the ICRC in 1947.39
Random shootings of
prisoners were common in the French camps. Lt. Col. Barnes reported that
drunken French army officers at Andernach one night drove their Jeep through
the camp laughing and shouting as they blasted the prisoners with their Sten
guns. The result was 47 prisoners dead and 55 wounded. French guards pretending
to notice an escape attempt at another camp shot down 10 prisoners in their
cages. The violence reached such heights in the 108th Infantry Regiment
that Gen. Billotte, the commanding officer of the Region, recommended that the
Regiment be dissolved. Billotte’s recommendation was based on the advice of Lt.
Col. de Champvallier, the Regiment’s CO, who had given up attempting to
discipline his men.40
French Capt. Julien thought
as he walked in the former American camp of 32,000 prisoners at Dietersheim in
July 1945, “This is just like Buchenwald and Dachau.”
The muddy ground was
“peopled with living skeletons,” some of whom died as he watched, others
huddled under bits of cardboard. Women lying in holes in the ground stared at
him with bulging bellies from hunger edema, old men with long grey hair watched
him feebly, and starving children of six or seven looked at him with lifeless
eyes. Julien could find no food at all in this camp. The two German doctors in
the “hospital” were attempting to take care of the many dying patients
stretched out on dirty blankets on the ground, between the marks of the tents
the Americans had taken with them.
The 103,500 prisoners in
five camps near Dietersheim were supposed to be part of the labor force given
by the Americans to the French for reparations. However, of these prisoners the
French counted 32,640 who could not work because they were old men, women,
children less than eight years old, boys age eight to 14, terminally sick or
cripples. All of these prisoners were immediately released. The prisoners found
at another former U.S. camp at Hechtsheim were also in lamentable condition.
The skeletal prisoners at Hechtsheim dressed in rags again reminded Capt.
Julien of the victims in German concentration camps. In his report, Julien called
the camps “bagnes de mort lents” or slow death camps.
Capt. Julien took immediate
steps to improve conditions in the camps. The official army ration had been
only 800 calories per person per day. This starvation level, which was the same
as the German concentration camp at Belsen when it was liberated, was all that
the French army allocated to POWs from its own supplies. Capt. Julien rounded
up the women from the village, who immediately brought food to the camp. Julien
received additional help in his efforts to improve conditions in the camps from
“German authorities” and the ICRC. By Aug. 1, 1945, over 90% of the prisoners
were housed in tents, food rations were greatly increased, and the death rate
had been cut by more than half. Capt. Julien’s system of improving the camps
worked. The U.S. Army could have adopted Julien’s humanitarian methods, but
chose instead to let the German POWs die of exposure and slow starvation.41
On a visit to one prison
camp, Robert Murphy, who was the civilian political advisor to Eisenhower while
he served for a few months as Military Governor, “was startled to see that our
prisoners were almost as weak and emaciated as those I had observed in Nazi
prison camps.”
The commandant of the camp
told Murphy that he had deliberately kept the inmates on a starvation diet. The
commandant explained, “These Nazis are getting a dose of their own medicine.”
Murphy was later able to get the commandant transferred to another post. It is
uncertain how much conditions at the camp improved after the commandant’s
transfer.42
Survivor Witnesses to the
American & French POW Camps
Surviving German prisoners
have provided additional testimony of the horrific conditions and mistreatment
they received in the Allied POW camps. Many surviving German prisoners were
badly mistreated even before arriving at the Allied camps. Werner Wilhelm
Laska, a German prisoner of war, reports his transfer to an American prison
camp:
The American guards who
arrived with the truck were nasty and cruel from the start. I was forced in
with kicks and punches to my back. Other German soldiers were already on board.
After a drive of an hour or two we arrived at an open field on which many
servicemen were already assembled, in rank and file. As we got off the truck, a
large group of Americans awaited us. They received us with shouts and yells,
such as: “You Hitler, you Nazi, etc. . . .” We got beaten, kicked and pushed;
one of those gangsters brutally tore my watch from my wrist. Each of these
bandits already possessed ten or twenty watches, rings and other things. The
beating continued until I reached the line where my comrades stood. Most of our
water-bottles (canteens), rucksacks etc. were cut off, and even overcoats had
to be left on the ground. More and more prisoners arrived, including even boys
and old men. After a few hours, big trailer-trucks—usually used for
transporting cattle—lined up for loading with human cattle.
We had to run the gauntlet
to get into the trucks; we were beaten and kicked. Then they jammed us in so tightly
that they couldn’t even close the hatches. We couldn’t even breathe. The
soldiers drove the vehicles at high speed over the roads and through villages
and towns; behind each trailer-truck always followed a jeep with a mounted
machine gun.
In late afternoon we stopped
in an open field again, and were unloaded in the same manner, with beating and
kicking. We had to line up at attention just like recruits in basic training.
Quickly, the Americans fenced us in with rolls of barbed wire, so there was no
space to sit or to lie down that night. We even had to do our necessities in
the standing position. Since we received no water or foodstuffs, our thirst and
hunger became acute and urgent. Some men still had tea in their canteens, but
there was hardly enough for everyone.
Next day the procedure began
as on the day before; running the gauntlet into the cattle-trailers, then
transport to the next open field. No drinking and no eating, but always fenced
in—there is an American song: “. . . Don’t fence me in. . .”—as well as the
childish behavior of most of the Americans: Punishing the Nazis! After the
first night, when we were loaded again, some of us stayed on that field, either
dead or so weak and sick that they could not move any more. We had been
approaching the Rhine River, as we noticed, but we had still one night to pass
in the manner related. It was terrible!
All this could not have been
a coincidence. It must have been a plan, because, as we later learned, there
was nearly the same treatment in all camps run by American units. During the
war we heard about the “Morgenthau-Plan” and the “Kaufman-Plan,” and exactly
that seemed to have been happening to us in those moments: the extermination of
an entire people!43
Laska eventually was sent to
France to work in coal mines and other unpleasant places, where his ordeal
continued. On Jan. 7, 1950, the French finally discharged Laska to Germany.44
James Bacque writes that the
response he has received following the original publication of Other
Losses has been amazing. Bacque states: “Most gratifying has been the
huge response from thousands of ex-prisoners who have written to me, or
telephoned, sent faxes or e-mail, or even called at my door, to thank me for
telling a story they feared would die with them. They continue to send me
diaries, letters, Tagebücher, self-published books, typescripts of
memoirs, in three or four languages, along with photographs, maps, drawings,
paintings and even a few artifacts.”45
Several prisoners from
Heilbronn have written Bacque to confirm the dreadful conditions witnessed by
Cpl. Daniel McConnell and Maj. Gen. Richard Steinbach. One is Anton Pfarrer,
who was 16 years old when captured and imprisoned at Heilbronn. Pfarrer writes:
“I can recall nearly every day of suffering, but I made it back, although so
many thousands never did. There were 3,000 men in my cage (Al) in May but by
the end of August, only 1,500 were left to answer roll call. They had all
died.” There were no discharges from his cage during that time. Pfarrer
telephoned Gen. Steinbach in 1998 to thank Steinbach for saving his life.46
Rudi Buchal had been ordered
to serve as a German medical orderly-clerk in the POW “hospital” at
Bretzenheim, a tent with an earth floor inside the camp. The hospital had no
beds, no medical supplies, no blankets, and starvation rations for the first
month or more. A few supplies were later obtained by American teams from the
German towns nearby. Buchal was told by drivers of the 560th Ambulance
Company that 18,100 POWs had died in the six camps round Bretzenheim in the 10
weeks of American control. Buchal also heard the figure of 18,100 dead from the
Germans who were in charge of the hospital statistics, and from other American
hospital personnel. The six camps were Bretzenheim, Biebelsheim, Bad Kreuznach,
Dietersheim, Hechtsheim, and Heidesheim.47
The reliability of Rudi
Buchal has been attested to by the U.S. Army itself. Upon discharge Buchal
received a paper stating that in the opinion of U.S. Army officers who
commanded him, “During the above mentioned period [April-July 1945] he proved
himself to be co-operative, capable, industrious and reliable.” Similar to the
experiences of U.S. Cpl. Daniel McConnell and French Dr. Joseph Kirsch, Buchal
discovered that these “hospitals” were merely places to take moribund prisoners
rather than places to help the prisoners get well. Buchal recalls that many of
the mortally sick evacuees were taken to Idstein, north of Wiesbaden. Buchal
states, “And I can remember that from there no prisoners returned.”48
German prisoners who
survived Bretzenheim have described arriving there on May 9, 1945. The
prisoners saw three rows of corpses along the road in front of the camp. A
total of 135 dead from Bretzenheim were acknowledged by the Americans to have
been buried in Stromberg on May 9 and May 10. Not all of the dead at
Bretzenheim were killed by the usual starvation, disease and exposure.49
Johannes Heising, formerly
the abbot of a monastery on the Rhine, published a book in the 1990s about his
experiences in the U.S. camp at Remagen. Franz-Josef Plemper, another former
prisoner at Remagen, reminded Heising of an event not described in Heising’s
book: on one night the Americans had bulldozed living men under the earth in
their foxholes. Plemper described the scene to Heising:
One night in April 1945, I
was startled out of my stupor in the rain and the mud by piercing screams and
loud groans. I jumped up and saw in the distance (about 30 to 50 meters) the
searchlight of a bulldozer. Then I saw this bulldozer moving forward through
the crowd of prisoners who lay there. In the front it had a blade making a
pathway. How many of the prisoners were buried alive in their earth holes I do
not know. It was no longer possible to ascertain. I heard clearly cries of “You
murderer.”
The horror of this incident
had been so painful that Heising had suppressed it from his memory. Heising
remembered this event only after Plemper reminded him of it.50
A similar incident occurred
at the American camp at Rheinberg in mid-June 1945. According to reports from
several ex-prisoners, the last act of the Americans at Rheinberg before the
British took over was to bulldoze one section of the camp level while there
were still living men in their holes in the ground.51
Prisoner Wolfgang Iff said
that in his sub-section of perhaps 10,000 people at Rheinberg, 30 to 40 bodies
were dragged out every day. As a member of the burial commando, Iff was well
placed to see what was going on. Iff saw about 60 to 70 bodies going out per
day in other cages of similar size.52
A 50-year-old sergeant with
a Ph.D. kept a diary in ink on toilet paper at Rheinberg. He writes on May 20,
1945: “How long will we have to be without shelter, without blankets or tents?
Every German soldier once had shelter from the weather. Even a dog has a
doghouse to crawl into when it rains. Our only wish is finally after six weeks
to get a roof over our heads. Even a savage is better housed. Diogenes,
Diogenes, you at least had your barrel.”53
Part of the problem at
Rheinberg was that for a long time it was overcrowded. A cage measuring 300
meters by 300 meters was supposed to hold no more than 10,000 people. However,
at the beginning, as many as 30,000 prisoners were forced in, leaving about
three square meters per person. Prisoner Thelen told his son through the barbed
wire that approximately 330 to 770 prisoners per day were dying at Rheinberg.
The camp then contained between 100,000 and 120,000 prisoners.54
Charles von Luttichau said
of his POW camp at Kripp near Remagen on the Rhine:
The latrines were just logs
flung over ditches next to the barbed wire fences. To sleep, all we could do
was to dig out a hole in the ground with our hands, then cling together in the
hole. We were crowded very close together. Because of illness, the men had to
defecate on the ground. Soon, many of us were too weak to take off our trousers
first. So our clothing was infected, and so was the mud where we had to walk
and sit and lie down. There was no water at all at first, except the rain, then
after a couple of weeks we could get a little water from a standpipe. But most
of us had nothing to carry it in, so we could get only a few mouthfuls after
hours of lining up, sometimes even through the night. We had to walk along
between the holes on the soft earth thrown up by the digging, so it was easy to
fall into a hole, but hard to climb out. The rain was almost constant along
that part of the Rhine that spring. More than half the days we had rain. More
than half the days we had no food at all. On the rest, we got a little K ration.
I could see from the package that they were giving us one tenth of the rations
that they issued to their own men. So in the end we got perhaps 5% of a normal
U.S. Army ration. I complained to the American camp commander that he was
breaking the Geneva Convention, but he just said, “Forget the Convention. You
haven’t any rights.”
Within a few days, some of
the men who had gone healthy into the camp were dead. I saw our men dragging
many dead bodies to the gate of the camp, where they were thrown loose on top
of each other onto trucks, which took them away.55
One 17-year-old boy who
could see his village in the distance was found shot one morning at the foot of
the barbed wire fence. His body was strung up and left hanging on the wire by
the guards as a warning to the other prisoners. Many prisoners cried out, “Moerder,
moerder [murderer, murderer]!” In retaliation, the camp commander
withheld the prisoners’ meager rations for three days. For prisoners who were
already starving and could hardly move because of weakness, it was frightful;
for many it meant death. The commander also withheld rations at other times to
punish the prisoners.56
George Weiss, a German tank
repairman, said his camp on the Rhine was so crowded that “we couldn’t even lie
down properly. All night we had to sit up jammed against each other. But the
lack of water was the worst thing of all. For three and a half days we had no
water at all. We would drink our own urine. It tasted terrible, but what could
we do? Some men got down on the ground and licked the ground to get some
moisture. I was so weak I was already on my knees, when finally we got a little
water to drink. I think I would have died without that water. But the Rhine was
just outside the wire. The guards sold us water through the wire, and
cigarettes. One cigarette cost 900 marks. I saw thousands dying. They took the
bodies away on trucks.”57
German Cpl. Helmut Liebich
was captured near Gotha in central Germany by the Americans on April 17, 1945.
The Gotha DEF camp had only the usual barbed wire fences with no tents. The
prisoners were forced to run a gauntlet between lines of guards who hit them
with sticks in order to get a small ration of food. On April 27, 1945, the
prisoners were transferred to the American camp at Heidesheim further west,
where there was no food at all for days, and then very little. The prisoners
started to die in large numbers from exposure, starvation and thirst. Liebich
saw about 10 to 30 bodies a day being dragged out of his section, Camp B, which
held about 5,200 prisoners.
On May 13, 1945, Liebich was
transferred to another American camp at Bingen-Buedesheim near Bad Kreuznach.
Liebich soon fell sick with dysentery and typhus. He was transferred again,
semi-conscious, in an open-topped railway car with about 60 other prisoners. On
a detour through Holland, the Dutch stood on bridges to smash stones down on
the heads of the prisoners. After three nights, Liebich’s fellow prisoners
helped him stagger into the American camp at Rheinberg, again without shelter
or much food.
One day in June 1945,
Liebich saw the British coming through the hallucinations of his fever. The
British saved his life in their hospital at Lintfort. Liebich remembered the
life-saving care he received from the British with gratitude for the rest of
his life. Liebich states: “It was wonderful to be under a roof in a real bed.
We were treated like human beings again. The Tommies treated us like comrades.”58
Former prisoners have also
reported numerous instances of prisoners and civilians who were shot by
American and French guards. Paul Kaps, a German soldier who was in the U.S.
camp at Bad Kreuznach, writes, “In one night, May 8, 1945, 48 prisoners were
shot dead in Cage 9.” Prisoner Hanns Scharf witnessed an especially gruesome
killing when a German woman with her two children asked an American guard at
Bad Kreuznach to give a wine bottle to her husband, who was just inside the
wire. The guard drank the wine himself, and when the bottle was empty the guard
killed the prisoner with five shots. The other prisoners protested, and U.S.
Army Lt. Holtsman said: “This is awful. I’ll make sure there is a stiff court
martial.” No evidence of a court martial of this or any other similar incidents
has ever been found.59
Prisoners and civilian women
were shot even though the Eisenhower order gave individual camp commanders a
chance to exempt family members trying to feed relatives through the wire.
German prisoner Paul Schmitt was shot in the American camp at Bretzenheim when
he came close to the wire to receive a basket of food from his wife and young
son. Dr. Helmut von Frizberg saw an American guard at Remagen shoot a German
prisoner for talking to his wife through the wire. Frau Agnes Spira was shot by
French guards at Dietersheim in July 1945 for taking food to prisoners. Her
memorial in nearby Buedesheim reads, “On the 31 of July 1945, my mother was
suddenly and unexpectedly torn from me because of her good deed toward the
imprisoned soldiers.”60
French Capt. Julien got into
serious trouble for quarreling with a fellow officer, Capt. Rousseau. Rousseau
shot at German women in Julien’s presence, at about the same time and in the
same place as a French officer shot Frau Spira. At Bad Kreuznach, William
Sellner said that at night guards would shoot machine gun bullets at random
into the camps, apparently for sport. Ernst Richard Krische in Bad Kreuznach
wrote in his diary on May 4, 1945: “Wild shooting in the night, absolute
fireworks. It must be the supposed peace. Next morning forty dead as ‘victims
of the fireworks,’ in our cage alone, many wounded.”61
Allies Have Ability to Feed
and Shelter Prisoners
The record clearly shows
that the Allies had the ability to feed and shelter their POWs. The Allies
prevented food from reaching Germany. James Bacque writes:
Even as the gallows at
Nuremberg displayed their awful warning, the Allies were depriving men, women
and children in Germany of available food. Foreign relief agencies were
prevented from sending food from abroad; Red Cross food trains were sent back
full to Switzerland; all foreign governments were denied permission to send
food to German civilians; fertilizer production was sharply reduced; and food
was confiscated during the first year, especially in the French zone. The
fishing fleet was kept in port while people starved. British soldiers actually
blew up one fishing boat in front of the eyes of astonished Germans. “The
people say the sea is full of fish, but they want to starve us,” said
Burgomaster Petersen.62
Some historians claim that
Eisenhower’s order banning civilian food supply of the camps was prompted by an
overall threat of a food shortage. However, many German prisoners and civilians
saw American guards burn the food brought by civilian women. Ernst Kraemer, a
prisoner at Buederich and Rheinberg, states: “At first, the women from the
nearby town brought food into the camp. The American soldiers took everything
away from the women, threw it in a heap and poured gasoline [benzine] over it
and burned it.” Writer Karl Vogel, the German camp commander appointed by the
Americans in Camp 8 at Garmisch-Partenkirchen, says that Eisenhower himself
ordered the food to be destroyed. The Americans were destroying food outside
the gate even though the prisoners were getting only 800 calories per day.63
German prisoner Herbert
Peters states concerning conditions at the huge U.S. camp at Rheinberg: “Even
when there was little for us to eat, the provisions enclosure was enormous.
Piles of cartons like bungalows with intersecting streets throughout.”64
Ten prisoners and several
civilians describe starvation conditions at Bretzenheim through the
approximately 70 days the camp was under U.S. control. The official U.S. Army
ration book shows that the prisoners at Bretzenheim received 600 to 850
calories per day. According to Capt. Lee Berwick of the 424th Infantry
Regiment, the prisoners at Bretzenheim starved even though food was piled up
all along the camp fence. Capt. Berwick could not explain why the prisoners got
only 600 to 850 calories per day. During the camp’s worst period of about 16
days, Berwick estimates that three to five bodies a day at Bretzenheim were
taken from each of 20 cages within the larger enclosure.65
The German prisoners went on
starving despite plenty of food in Europe. The U.S. Army had stored 13,500,000
high-protein Red Cross food parcels in army warehouses in Europe taken over
from the ICRC in May 1945. On Nov. 17, 1945, the army was still wondering what
to do with these parcels. Each parcel contained on average 12,000 calories.
There was enough food in them to have given the approximately 700,000 German
prisoners who had died by then a supplementary 1,000 calories per day for about
eight months. The ICRC parcels alone would probably have kept most of the German
prisoners alive until early 1946.66
One of the first signs of
the Allies’ starvation policy came from North America, where the ICRC
delegation reported that the German prisoners’ rations had been cut as soon as
Germany released its Allied POWs. Then, in late May or early June 1945, the
ICRC loaded two freight trains with food from their warehouses in Switzerland,
where they had over 100,000 tons of food in storage. The trains traveled to
their destination in the American sector via the normal route prescribed by the
German government during the war. When the trains reached their destinations,
the U.S. Army informed the ICRC officials accompanying the trains that the
warehouses were full. The trains were forced to return to Switzerland.67
Max Huber, the head of the
ICRC, began inquiries into the U.S. Army’s actions. After a long investigation,
Huber wrote a letter to the U.S. State Department. Huber referred to the Red
Cross food trains that were returned full to Switzerland in the spring of 1945.
Huber writes:
When hostilities in Europe
ceased, the International Committee of the Red Cross made every effort to
improve the situation of prisoners of all categories whose status after the
liberation by the Allied Armies became that of “ex-prisoner of war.” Anticipating
the difficulties which would result from these circumstances, the Committee
hoped to alleviate as much as possible the hardships of the former internee by
working out a relief scheme with the Allied military authorities which, while
bringing a considerable measure of aid, would also prove to be a rational means
of liquidating the accumulated stocks in Switzerland and other countries.
. . . Meanwhile, the
numerous communications from Allied officers in charge of assembly areas and
camps for Displaced Persons; the reports of our delegates on medical missions
in Germany; and especially the many direct requests addressed to us from the
Camps themselves, bear witness to the fact that tens if not hundreds of
thousands of displaced persons in Germany are still in dire need of aid. From
all this we are bound to recognize that the demands made upon the
Anglo-American pool by the competent sections of the Allied armies are not
proportionate to the prevailing need. . . . In consequence, the humanitarian work
of the International Committee is in danger of becoming discredited. Our
responsibility for the proper use of relief supplies placed in our care is
incompatible with a restriction to the fulfillment of orders which render us
powerless to furnish relief which we ourselves judge necessary.
The anticipated requisitions
were either not made at all, or else came in with much delay. Having effected
delivery with our trains in Germany in default of those promised by the Allied
armies in Germany but never placed at our disposal, we would then find that the
receiving personnel at the various destinations were without proper
instructions as to the handling of these consignments. If the warehouse
happened to be full, our trains would be refused there in turn. That the
warehouses were still filled to overflowing was proof positive that the
distributions in view of which previous requisitions had been made were still
in abeyance. . . . The Allied authorities’ dispositions . . . of Anglo-American
stocks . . . have failed to achieve relief in reasonable proportion to the
extent of these stocks and degree of transport facilities available.
Practical experience showed
. . . that in consequence of the general food shortage caused by the occupation
army’s normal requisitions and the dislocation of transport, the [armies] were
unable to allot even a minimum ration to the Balts, Bulgarians, Hungarians,
Italians, Rumanians and apatrides [stateless people] on
Germany territory.
Thus, stating our case fully
to the governments and Red Cross Societies concerned, we desire to stress the
fact that the conditions set forth above leave us no alternative but to express
our grave concern for the immediate future. To stand passively by whilst
holding large quantities of immediately available relief supplies and knowing
the plight of many camps of Displaced persons of all categories in Germany,
growing steadily more alarming, is not compatible with the tradition of our
institution.68
The United States Force,
European Theater (USFET), over Eisenhower’s signature, calmly ignored
everything Huber said in his letter. Huber was forced to return the food to its
original donors because the army refused to distribute it. There was so much food
to return that it took thousands of train cars to return the food to its
sources in Paris and Brussels. Huber apologized for clogging the rail system in
France with this unnecessary work. Huber also had to obtain extra trucks beyond
the 500 belonging to the ICRC in Geneva to return over 30,000 tons of food to
the original donors.69
Relief agencies such as the
YMCA, the Unitarians, the American Friends Service Committee (the Quakers), and
various other church groups were also attempting to send aid into Germany. For
the crucial months until November 1945, while Eisenhower was military governor
of the U.S. zone of Germany, the army made it difficult if not impossible for
welfare from relief agencies to reach Germans. For example, the American
Quakers were ordered to keep out of the U.S. zone. Also, the YMCA was refused
permission by the U.S. Army to feed German prisoners in U.S. camps in France
even though the YMCA offered to pay for all goods received from the army. The
general attitude of the U.S. Army towards civilian relief agencies is clear
from the opinion expressed by Stephen Cary, European Commissioner of the
American Friends Service Committee, who said, “We were very unhappy with their
heavy-handed and restrictive treatment.”70
The Quartermaster Progress
Reports from April through June 1945 also confirm that there was a huge surplus
of food in the U.S. Army. Every month shows a vast surplus amounting to more
than 100 days on hand for the whole army. This food surplus existed even though
there was mass starvation in the U.S. POW camps.71
The U.S. Army also had
plenty of tents, barbed wire, medical and other supplies for the German
prisoners. These items were scarce in the camps not because the army lacked
supplies, but because requests for supplies were denied. Gen. Everett S. Hughes
said on March 19, 1945, after he visited the huge supply dumps at Naples and
Marseille: “[Marseille is] Naples all over again. More stocks than we can ever
use. Stretch as far as eye can see.”72
Gen. Robert Littlejohn, who
as quartermaster of USFET was in charge of Eisenhower’s supplies, tried to get
agreement on how to dispose of the army’s surplus subsistence. Littlejohn wrote
to Eisenhower on Oct. 10, 1945: “There is in this Theater a substantial excess
of subsistence in certain items due to the rapid discharge of prisoners of war
after VE day, the accelerated deployment of U.S. Military, the sharp decrease
in employment by U.S. forces of allied liberated nationals and the ending of
the supply responsibilities of the French army. . . .”73
The rations the U.S. Army
had accumulated in October 1945 amounted to a 139 day supply of food in the
European Theater of Operations. This was 39 days more than the 100 day supply
of food the army liked to keep on hand. The surplus in the United States was so
great that Gen. Littlejohn noted that “we have been invited to increase our
rations of fruit juices and have been advised that our requirements for fresh
eggs, fresh fruits, potatoes and butter can and should be met from U.S.
sources.” Littlejohn’s letter goes on to discuss a policy on how to get rid of
the surplus, which some officers wanted to send to the United States. Despite
this surplus, the German prisoners in U.S. camps kept on starving.74
The evidence also suggests
that France had enough food to feed their German POWs. The total number of
prisoners on hand in France at its peak of about 800,000 represented about 2%
of France’s total population of about 40 million in 1945. If, as many German
prisoners contend, their ration was about half the minimum to sustain life,
then just 1% of the total food consumed in France would have saved them all
from starvation. This food could have turned the German prisoners into
productive workers contributing to the French economic recovery.75
The failure of the Red Cross
and other relief agencies to supply the German POWs with food stands in stark
contrast to the success of the Red Cross during the war. As the French,
American, British and Canadian prisoners left German captivity at the end of
World War II, the Red Cross was there to welcome them with food parcels drawn
from the millions in storage in their warehouses in Switzerland. The returning
prisoners had received about 1,500 calories per day from the Germans. Another
life-saving 2,000 calories per day had arrived by mail, mainly from France,
Canada and the United States.
The effectiveness of the Red
Cross care was demonstrated by the fact that, according to a news release of
the American Red Cross in May 1945, over 98% of the Allied prisoners were
coming home safe. The released prisoners were in good health not only because
of the food, but also because of clothing and medicine which had arrived safely
by mail.76
The Soviet, British, and
Canadian Prisoner of War Camps
The opening of the KGB
archives after the fall of the communist regime in the Soviet Union provided
accurate and detailed information of how many Germans died in the Soviet camps.
German soldiers captured by the Soviets between June 22, 1941, and Sept. 9,
1945, totaled 2,389,560, of which 450,587 died in Soviet captivity. Of the
450,587 who died, 356,687 died in rear camps run by the NKVD, and 93,900 died
between capture at the front and arrival in the rear camps. An additional
271,672 German civilians were imprisoned, of which 66,481 died. The total
number of German prisoners who died in Soviet captivity, both civilian and
military, is therefore 517,068.77
The KGB generated millions
of pages of detailed records of their prisoners. A personal dossier was kept
for each prisoner, recording his name, unit, serial number, dates of capture
and release, medical and legal history. The dossiers average around 20 pages
per prisoner. The Soviet archives prove beyond a doubt that the Soviets
committed enormous crimes against their surrendered prisoners. Soviet prisoners
died under conditions that were contrary to the rules of war, against the
Geneva Convention, against the Soviet constitution and even against Soviet
self-interest. The skills and labor of these prisoners, who could have
contributed to the rebuilding of a ruined Russia after the war, were sacrificed
for nothing.78
The Soviet prisoners slaved
in a vast system of 6,000 camps spread across the U.S.S.R. The camps were
located from Minsk in the west, to Karaganda in the south-center, to Vorkuta in
the north, and to Magadan in the northeast. The general impression in the West
is that life in the gulag for prisoners consisted of unvaried suffering under a
relentless cruelty. While this is mostly true, the Soviets did sometimes take
measures to improve camp conditions.
For example, between Jan. 10
and Feb. 22, 1943, at Stalingrad, the Red Army took 91,545 German prisoners of
war. Most of these prisoners were taken to Beketovka, where conditions were so
bad that within a few weeks 42,000 out of 55,000 prisoners died. The Soviets
conducted an investigation into the conditions at Beketovka between March 22
and 25, 1943. The doctors reported that 71% of the prisoners were sick, many
infested with lice and with inadequate clothing. The Soviets soon provided more
food and better accommodations for their German prisoners, and by the end of
the war the camp had its own vegetable gardens.79
By contrast to the other
Allies, the British and Canadians responsibly took care of their POWs. Soon
after VE day, the total prisoners under British and Canadian control came to
over 2 million. At first the British and Canadians were short of food and
shelter for their German prisoners. However, with the exception of the British
camp at Overijsche, the British and Canadian camps soon provided enough food
and shelter for the prisoners to survive in fair health. The British members of
the Combined Chiefs of Staff also refused to adopt the American designation of
DEF status for their German prisoners. They instead used the term “surrendered
enemy personnel” (SEP) to distinguish their POWs who they could not treat
according to the letter of the Geneva Convention.80
The experience of German
prisoner Werner Heyne is typical of the treatment POWs received in British and
Canadian camps. Heyne was in a camp near Dieppe where there were “many
thousands of men crowded into the cages built in the fields.” The prisoners
were immediately fed, given enough to drink, and got tents within a few days.
There were no deaths in this camp, and after a month the German POWs were
shipped to better camps in England.81 Probably less than 10,000 German
POWs died in British and Canadian captivity.82
How Could Such Atrocities Be
Concealed?
After the Allies defeated
Germany in 1945, the press in Germany was directly licensed and censured by the
victors. Eisenhower or his deputies ran everything inside Germany, so
censorship was extremely easy to maintain. The Allies established a client
government in which journalists, writers, artists, and academics all supported
“the West.”83 Both the German and Allied press refused to publish anything
concerning Allied atrocities, while stories about German atrocities were
frequently published.
For example, Gens. George
Patton, Omar Bradley, and Dwight Eisenhower toured the German concentration
camp at Ohrdruf on April 12, 1945. They saw more than 3,200 naked, emaciated
dead bodies flung into shallow graves, with many more dead bodies lying in the
streets where they had fallen. Soon after seeing Ohrdruf, Eisenhower ordered
every unit nearby that was not in the front lines to tour the camp. Eisenhower
stated: “We are told that the American soldier does not know what he is
fighting for. Now, at least, he will know what he is fighting against.”
Eisenhower also cabled
London and Washington, urging delegations of officials and newsmen to be
eyewitnesses to the camps. Eisenhower’s message to Washington read: “We are
constantly finding German camps in which they have placed political prisoners
where unspeakable conditions exist. From my own personal observation, I can
state unequivocally that all written statements up to now do not paint the full
horrors.”84
The tour of liberated
concentration camps became a ritual in the occupied Germany of late April and
early May. American officers forced local citizens and German POWs to view the
camps. German civilians were paraded against their will in front of the
sickening piles of dead bodies found in the German camps.
A long string of official
visitors also began to answer Eisenhower’s call for witnesses to the horrors in
the camps. Congress chose a bipartisan joint committee to tour the sites of the
camps, and the Congressmen were all shocked at the conditions in the camps. In
addition to the Congressional tour, Eisenhower arranged for a committee of
distinguished American journalists to make a similar inspection of the camps.
The American journalists all dutifully reported the horrors they had witnessed
at the camps.85
Joseph Pulitzer, a
German-American in the heavily German-American city of St. Louis, was so
incensed by what he saw at the camps that he launched a campaign of public
education. Pulitzer wanted to dispel the belief in America that this talk of
German atrocities is mostly propaganda. In cooperation with the federal
government, Pulitzer’s St. Louis Post-Dispatch conducted an
exhibition of life-size photomurals made from the Signal Corps photographs of
the camps. The photo exhibit was coupled with the showing of an hour-long
motion picture documentary on the camps produced by the Signal Corps.86 Soon
virtually everyone in the civilized world had seen pictures of the horrific
conditions in the German concentration camps.
Dwight Eisenhower could have
authorized the same public exposure of the DEF camps he ran in Germany. For
obvious reasons he chose not to. The censorship by SHAEF under Eisenhower’s
command was stricter than it had been during the actual fighting. The New
York Times argued vigorously against this policy in a front page news
story on May 27, 1945: “The American people are being deprived of information
to which they are entitled. . . . It seems almost as though now that there is
no enemy to fight, high Army officers are spending a large part of their time
writing directives to circumscribe the movements and activities of war
correspondents.”87
The U.S. Army kept close
watch over what the press was saying. Eisenhower and his staff carefully monitored
and controlled how their reputations were being treated by the press.
Eisenhower even told a meeting of American newspaper editors, “I have always
considered as quasi-staff officers, correspondents accredited to my
headquarters.” According to Gen. Patton, Eisenhower expected complete loyalty
and solidarity in the event any of them were called before a congressional
committee. Why was Eisenhower so wary of public opinion? Gen. Patton suggests
an answer: because Eisenhower was using “practically Gestapo methods” against
Germany.88
The United States government
also refused to allow the ICRC to visit the German POWs in direct defiance of
American obligations under the Geneva Convention. The ICRC under the Geneva
Convention was supposed to visit the POWs in the camps and then report in
secret to the Holding Power and the Protecting Power. On May 8, 1945, VE day,
the U.S. State Department informed the Swiss government that its role as
Protecting Power for the disintegrated German government was abolished. With
this done, the U.S. State Department informed the ICRC that there was no need
to continue visits in Germany as the Protecting Power had been abolished. ”89
The elimination of the ICRC
and the Swiss government had disastrous consequences for the German POWs. The
German POWs lost the right to tell impartial observers in private what was
happening to them. The right to send and receive mail also disappeared with the
Swiss. The U.S. War Department imposed the most damaging ban of all, covering
all the U.S. camps, when it disallowed the mailing of Red Cross parcels to the
prisoners. This eliminated the ability of German POWs to get sufficient food as
well as to send news of their treatment to others and to receive news from
home. No news from the camps would leak out to impartial observers. This allowed
the treatment of the German POWs to be conducted for many years in a secrecy
that was maintained against all but the victims.90
Prime Minister William Lyon
Mackenzie King of Canada made the only important protest on the Allied side
against the removal of the ICRC from Germany. King’s protest was quickly
squelched by the British, who pointed out that the other Allies had all agreed that
the German government was to be extinguished, and that to leave provisional
representation of POW interests by the Swiss might be dangerous. Of course,
what it would be dangerous to were the French and American governments. The
mass murder of German POWs could not have continued if the ICRC had been
allowed to visit the Allied POW camps.91
Germans have been permitted
to dig up mass graves of prisoners at former Russian camps, but the German
government has sometimes prevented the uncovering of evidence from the French
and American POW camps. For example, Otto Tullius, a German prisoner who
survived Bretzenheim, was a farmer who owned some of the land where he was
imprisoned. After the camp was closed, the land was returned to Tullius, and he
began farming there again. As Tullius plowed the land, he kept turning up
cast-offs from the prisoners in the camp such as flasks, belt buckles, and tin
dishes. In the 1980s, Otto Schmitt began to excavate on the land beside the
Tullius house, searching for more artifacts or even bodies from the camp.
Schmitt was forced to stop his excavation work when the police threatened him
with a fine of 250,000 DM.92
At Rheinberg, German
construction crews in the 1950s and gravediggers in the 1980s discovered human
remains with German army World War II dog tags. These human remains were
jumbled closely together in common graves with no sign of coffin or grave
marker.93
Other evidence of mass
graves of German POWs at American-run camps has been found at Lambach in
Austria in early 1996. Horst Littmann, an expert recommended by the Austrian
Ministry of the Interior, concluded that the bodies were from American POW
camps at Hofau, Grueberfeld, and Kuhweide.94 However, this evidence of
mass death of German POWs was not reported to the public by the media.
Another example of Allied
censorship is when Jean-Pierre Pradervand of the ICRC gave Gen. Bedell Smith,
Eisenhower’s chief of staff, pictures of starved, dying German prisoners at
Thorée les Pins. These prisoners had recently been transferred from the
Americans to the French. Pradervand’s photographs disappeared into Eisenhower’s
office, not to be seen again until they reappeared as evidence of atrocities in
French POW camps. Then the photographs disappeared forever. They are not preserved
among the many photographs in the Smith collection at Abilene. The world press
issued a story exonerating the U.S. Army, and the German POWs kept on dying.95
How Many German POWs Died in
U.S. & French Camps?
The families of the dead
German POWs eventually influenced government officials to look into the fate of
their missing family members. The (West German) Government Ministry of
Refugees, under Chancellor Konrad Adenauer, had the Germans complete a survey.
The survey was about 94% complete in the three Western zones, but only about
30% complete in the Soviet zone. The survey announced on March 31, 1950, that
there were still missing, their fate unknown, about 1,407,000 persons. There
were believed to be 69,000 ex-soldiers still in prison, 1,148,000 soldiers
reported missing, and 190,000 missing civilians.96 If everyone had
completed the survey, it is estimated that the missing POWs would total about
1.7 million.97
Since the Soviet archives
prove that approximately 517,000 German POWs died in Soviet captivity, we can
get a reasonable approximation of the German POW deaths in French and U.S.
camps. If we subtract the 517,000 German prisoners who died in Soviet captivity
from the 1,407,000 total German prisoners missing in the survey, we have a
total missing prisoner amount of 890,000. If we then subtract 100,000 from this
total to account for the estimated number of German POWs who died in
Yugoslavia, Poland, and other countries, the German POW deaths in American and
French captivity amount to 790,000. If the more realistic total of 1.7 million
is used as the estimate of total German POW deaths, the total deaths of German
POWs in French and American captivity would be 1,083,000. These amounts confirm
James Bacque’s original estimate of German POW deaths in 1989 before the
Soviets opened their archives.
Most historians still
dispute that such large numbers of German POWs died in the American and French
POW camps. Some historians use the official figures of the Maschke Commission
to refute Bacque’s estimates. The Maschke Commission, which was set up by the
German government to investigate the fate of German POWs, officially completed
its work at the end of 1972. A modest amount of its series of 22 books was
sold, mainly to universities and research libraries.
Willy Brandt has admitted
that the books edited by Dr. Erich Maschke were financed and censored by the
West German Foreign Office in order to serve German foreign policy. Dr.
Maschke’s figures are demonstrably wrong. For example, the Maschke U.S. wartime
capture figure of 3,761,431 is more than 2,000,000 lower than the true U.S.
total capture in North Africa, Italy and northern Europe.98 The Maschke
Commission estimate of 1,094,250 German POW deaths in Soviet camps is also far
higher than the amount recorded in Soviet archives.99
Other historians say that
Bacque misinterpreted the words “Other Losses” in the Weekly Prisoner of War
and Disarmed Enemy Forces Reports. They claim that this category includes far
more than deaths and escapes. Col. Philip S. Lauben told James Bacque in 1987
that the heading Other Losses means deaths and escapes, with the escapes being
only a very minor amount. Lauben was the Head of the German Affairs Branch of
SHAEF. He was the officer in charge of repatriations and transfers who helped
prepare the weekly forms that used the term Other Losses.
Lauben gave Bacque
permission to tape their interview and signed a transcript of his statement to
Bacque that Other Losses means deaths and escapes. More than a month later, and
knowing that Col. Ernest F. Fisher had been an army historian, Lauben also told
Fisher that Other Losses means deaths and escapes. Since Lauben worked
regularly with these documents, he was in a position to know what Other Losses
meant.100
Until someone can find
errors in the German survey under Adenauer or in the released Soviet archives,
Bacque’s estimate of German POWs who died in American and French captivity
appears to be reasonable. Bacque states: “Among all of the many editors,
writers, TV producers and professors all over Europe and North America who have
furiously denounced the author of Other Losses since
1989, not one has ever commented on his subsequent amazing discoveries in the
Soviet archives.”101
Closing Remarks on Other
Losses
One critic of Other
Losses has asked: “How could the bodies disappear without one
soldier’s coming forward in nearly fifty years to relieve his conscience?”102 The
answer to this question is that numerous American soldiers and officers have
come forth to witness the atrocious death rate in the American and French POW
camps. From low-ranking soldiers such as Martin Brech, Daniel McConnell, and
Merrill W. Campbell, through middle-rank officers such as Ben H. Jackson,
Frederick Siegfriedt, and Lee Berwick, to high-ranking officers such as Richard
Steinbach, Henry W. Allard, James B. Mason, Charles H. Beasley, Mark Clark, and
Herbert Pollack, Americans have described the lethal conditions in the American
and French POW camps. All of the American eyewitness reports are extended and
confirmed by the thousands of Germans who have written letters, books, and
articles showing beyond reasonable doubt a high death rate in the Allied POW
camps.
Gen. Eisenhower had deplored
the Germans’ useless defense at the end of World War II because of the waste of
life. However, the Germans died faster in the French and American POW camps
after they surrendered than they had during the war. By one estimate, 10 times
as many Germans died in the French and American POW camps as were killed in all
combat on the Western Front in northwest Europe from June 1941 to April 1945.103
James Bacque ends his
outstanding book with an appeal for open-mindedness and understanding. Bacque
states: “Surely it is time for the guesswork and the lying to stop. Surely it
is time to take seriously what the eye-witnesses on both sides are trying to
tell us about our history. All over the Western world, savage atrocities
against the Armenians, the Ukrainians and the Jews are known. Only the
atrocities against the Germans are denied. Are Germans not people in our eyes?”104
Whenever a historian denies
that the Western Allies mass murdered German POWs, I recall a conversation I
had with an elderly German couple in the late 1990s. After the wife told me she
had been in Berlin when the Red Army captured the city, I asked them the
following question: Do you know that the Western Allies, led by the United
States of America, intentionally starved to death approximately 1 million
German prisoners of war after the war was over?
An agonizing look of pain
overtook the husband as they both said “Yes.” The agonizing look of pain on the
husband’s face did not result from his merely reading a book. His pain was
caused by something he had lived through. Unfortunately, since he is German,
most historians could care less about his pain and suffering.
CHAPTER NOTES:
1 Terkel, Studs, The
Good War, New York: Pantheon, 1984, p. vi.
2 Gruettner, Maria, “Real
Death Camps of World War II,” The Barnes Review, Vol. XVIII, No. 4,
July/August 2012, pp. 28-29.
3 Bacque, James, Other
Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners at the Hands
of the French and Americans after World War II, 3rd edition,
Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2011, pp. xv-xvii.
4 Bacque, James, Crimes
and Mercies: The Fate of German Civilians under Allied Occupation, 1944-1950,
2nd edition, Vancouver, British Columbia: Talonbooks, 2007, p. xiii.
5 Bacque, James, Other
Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners
at the Hands of the French and Americans after World War II, 3rd
edition, Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2011, pp. lxv-lxvi.
6 Ibid., pp.
lxvi-lxvii.
7 Brech, Martin, “In
‘Eisenhower’s Death Camps’: A U.S. Prison Guard’s Story,” The Journal
of Historical Review, Vol. 10, No. 2, Summer 1990, pp. 161-166.
8 Bacque, James, Crimes
and Mercies: The Fate of German Civilians under Allied Occupation, 1944-1950,
2nd edition, Vancouver, British Columbia: Talonbooks, 2007, pp. 41, 44.
9 Ibid., pp.
45-46.
10 Bacque, James, Other
Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners at the Hands
of the French and Americans after World War II, 3rd edition,
Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2011, p. xx.
11 Ibid., pp.
xx-xxi.
12 Ibid., pp.
xviii-xix.
13 Ibid., pp.
xix-xx.
14 Ibid.
15 Ibid., p.
190. See also Bacque, James, Crimes and Mercies: The Fate of German
Civilians under Allied Occupation, 1944-1950, 2nd edition, Vancouver,
British Columbia: Talonbooks, 2007, p. 29.
16 Ibid., p.
100.
17 Ibid., p. 31.
18 Ibid., p.
194.
19 Dos Passos, John, Tour
of Duty, Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1945, pp. 251-252.
20 Bacque, James, Other
Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners at the Hands
of the French and Americans after World War II, 3rd edition,
Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2011, pp. 184-185.
21 Ibid., p.
184.
22 Ibid., pp.
191-192.
23 Ibid., pp.
192-193.
24 Ibid., p.
193.
25 Ibid., p.
192.
26 Ibid., p.
194.
27 Ibid., p. 18.
28 Bacque, James, Crimes
and Mercies: The Fate of German Civilians under Allied Occupation, 1944-1950,
2nd edition, Vancouver, British Columbia: Talonbooks, 2007, pp. 40-43.
29 Ibid., pp.
49-50.
30 Bacque, James, Other
Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners at the Hands
of the French and Americans after World War II, 3rd edition,
Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2011, p. xxxi.
31 The Journal of
Historical Review, Vol. 14, No. 4, July/August 1994, p. 48.
32 Bacque, James, Other
Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners at the Hands
of the French and Americans after World War II, 3rd edition,
Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2011, pp. 186-187.
33 Ibid., p.
xxxix.
34 Ibid., pp.
97-98.
35 Ibid., pp.
87-88.
36 Ibid., p. 89.
37 Ibid., p. 91.
38 Clair, Louis, The
Progressive, Jan. 14, 1946, p. 4. Quoted in Keeling, Ralph Franklin, Gruesome
Harvest: The Allies’ Postwar War Against the German People, Torrance, CA:
Institute for Historical Review, 1992, pp. 22-23.
39 Bacque, James, Other
Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners at the Hands
of the French and Americans after World War II, 3rd edition,
Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2011, p. 107.
40 Ibid., pp.
85-86.
41 Ibid., pp.
81-83.
42 Ibid., pp.
144-145.
43 Laska, Werner Wilhelm,
“In a U.S. Death Camp—1945,” The Journal of Historical Review, Vol.
10, No. 2, Summer 1990, pp. 169-170.
44 Ibid., p.
175.
45 Bacque, James, Other
Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners at the Hands
of the French and Americans after World War II, 3rd edition,
Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2011, p. xxiii.
46 Ibid., p.
xxii.
47 Bacque, James, Crimes
and Mercies: The Fate of German Civilians under Allied Occupation, 1944-1950,
2nd edition, Vancouver, British Columbia: Talonbooks, 2007, pp. 49-50.
48 Ibid., pp.
50-51, 53.
49 Bacque, James, Other
Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners at the Hands
of the French and Americans after World War II, 3rd edition, Vancouver:
Talonbooks, 2011, pp. xxxiv-xxxv.
50 Ibid., p.
lxiii.
51 Ibid., p.
130.
52 Ibid., pp.
40-41.
53 Ibid., pp.
37, 39.
54 Ibid., p. 41.
55 Ibid., pp.
33-34.
56 Ibid., p. 34.
57 Ibid., p. 36.
58 Ibid., pp.
128-130.
59 Ibid., pp.
xxxiv, 239.
60 Ibid., pp.
xxxii-xxxiv.
61 Bacque, James, Crimes
and Mercies: The Fate of German Civilians under Allied Occupation, 1944-1950,
2nd edition, Vancouver, British Columbia: Talonbooks, 2007, p. 46.
62 Ibid., p. 88.
63 Ibid., pp.
91, 231 (footnote 13).
64 Bacque, James, Other
Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners at the Hands
of the French and Americans after World War II, 3rd edition,
Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2011, p. xxxvii.
65 Ibid., pp.
xxxi, xxxvi-xxxvii.
66 Ibid., p.
102.
67 Ibid., p. 69.
68 Ibid., pp.
69-71.
69 Ibid., p. 73.
70 Ibid., pp.
68, 73, 75-76.
71 Ibid., pp.
54, 274 (footnote 32).
72 Ibid., p. 28.
73 Ibid., pp.
17, 97.
74 Ibid., p. 97.
75 Ibid., p.
110.
76 Ibid., pp.
67-68.
77 Ibid., pp.
xlii, lx.
78 Ibid., pp.
xliii, xliv.
79 Ibid., pp.
xlvi-xlvii.
80 Ibid., pp.
23-24, 128.
81 Ibid., pp.
127-128.
82 Ibid., p.
lxi.
83 Ibid., pp.
142, 177.
84 Abzug, Robert H., Inside
the Vicious Heart: Americans and the Liberation of Nazi Concentration Camps,
New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985, pp. 27, 30.
85 Ibid., pp.
69, 128-132.
86 Ibid., p.
134.
87 Bacque, James, Other
Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners at the Hands
of the French and Americans after World War II, 3rd edition,
Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2011, p. 62.
88 Ibid., pp.
62, 142-143. The “practically Gestapo methods” quote is from Blumenson, Martin,
(ed.), The Patton Papers, 1940-1945, Boston: Houghton-Mifflin,
1974, p. 742.
89 Ibid.,
pp. 63-64.
90 Ibid.,
pp. 57, 64.
91 Ibid., pp.
64-65.
92 Ibid., p.
xxxv.
93 Ibid., p. 41.
94 Bacque, James, Crimes
and Mercies: The Fate of German Civilians under Allied Occupation, 1944-1950,
2nd edition, Vancouver, British Columbia: Talonbooks, 2007, p. 45.
95 Bacque, James, Other
Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners at the Hands
of the French and Americans after World War II, 3rd edition,
Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2011, pp. 96, 243-244.
96 Ibid., pp.
xli, 148.
97 Ibid., p. 293
(footnote 26).
98 Ibid., pp.
xxiv, lvi-lvii, 149-150, 177.
99 The amount of 1,094,250
German POW deaths from the Maschke Commission is shown by Lowe, Keith, Savage
Continent: Europe in the Aftermath of World War II, New York: St. Martin’s
Press, 2012, p. 122.
100 Bacque, James, Other
Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners at the Hands
of the French and Americans after World War II, 3rd edition,
Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2011, pp. 181-183.
101 Ibid., pp.
lxii-lxiii.
102 Bischof, Guenter,
“Bacque and Historical Evidence,” in Bischof, Guenter and Ambrose, Stephen E.,
(eds.), Eisenhower and the German POWs: Facts Against Falsehood,
Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press, 1992, p. 201.
103 Bacque, James, Other
Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners at the Hands
of the French and Americans after World War II, 3rd edition,
Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2011, p. 59.
104 Ibid.,
p. 196.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.