The History of the Liberation of the Camps
Introduction
The liberation of the Nazi camps in the final stages of World War II unveiled the staggering scale of the Holocaust, marking a pivotal moment in modern history. As Allied forces advanced into German-occupied territory, and next into the Third Reich soil, they encountered a network of concentration camps, each a testament to the Nazi regime’s systematic genocide.
The first major camp liberation occurred at Majdanek in July 1944, followed by the discovery of camps such as Auschwitz, Buchenwald, Dachau, and Bergen-Belsen. These liberations were not only military operations but also humanitarian efforts, as soldiers confronted the overwhelming task of aiding survivors in dire need of medical care and sustenance.
The conditions encountered by the liberators were beyond comprehension: emaciated prisoners, mass graves, and evidence of unimaginable cruelty. The survivors, many on the brink of death, bore witness to the horrors of the camp system, including forced labor, medical experiments, and mass extermination.
The liberation also marked the beginning of a complex phase of displacement and recovery. Survivors, many without homes or families to return to, faced the daunting task of rebuilding their lives. The Allied forces, grappling with the logistical and moral challenges, established Displaced Persons camps to provide temporary shelter and aid.
These events also played a crucial role in documenting the Holocaust’s atrocities. Liberators, journalists, and photographers captured images and testimonies, creating a crucial historical record. The evidence gathered was instrumental in the Nuremberg Trials, where key Nazi officials were held accountable for their crimes against humanity.
Read more
Discovery of the camps
This discovery of the camps began with the Soviet troops’ entry into camps like Majdanek in July 1944 and Auschwitz-Birkenau, where they found evidence of mass extermination and survivors in dire conditions.
The liberation of these camps was not a pre-planned objective for the Soviets or the Western Allies but rather a consequence of their military advances. The discovery of camps like Struthof in November 1944 by the Allies and the subsequent liberation of other camps, including Dachau and Mauthausen, were driven by military imperatives rather than a deliberate strategy to free the prisoners. These liberations often led to armed confrontations with the remaining German forces and revealed the horrific conditions endured by the prisoners.
The liberation scenes were sometimes reenacted for media purposes, as seen at Auschwitz and Mauthausen, to create a more powerful narrative of the camps’ liberation. These reenactments aimed to emphasize the victorious role of the liberating forces and the joy of the freed prisoners, though they sometimes lacked authenticity.
Post-liberation, many camps like Dachau, Mauthausen, and Bergen-Belsen were placed under quarantine to control the spread of diseases like typhus or were destroyed. Survivors had to adapt to living in the very places of their detention, with many continuing to die due to weak health and inadequate conditions. This period was marked by tributes to the victims, religious ceremonies, and the resumption of free information.
In camps like Bergen-Belsen, the aftermath of liberation was particularly challenging. Despite the end of their imprisonment, thousands of survivors died due to malnutrition, disease, and the consequences of their past sufferings. However, survivors, particularly Jewish ones, began to take control of their lives, organizing daily life and establishing committees to manage health, economy, culture, and religious needs. This period saw the emergence of cultural activities, publications, and a resurgence of community life.
Media coverage
Initially, information about the liberated camps circulated sparingly, with journalists’ freedom of expression constrained by military censorship and directives from the Frenay Ministry, aimed at not alarming families.
In mid-April 1945, a shift occurred when General Eisenhower called on journalists worldwide to witness the horrors of the concentration camps. This marked the beginning of a significant press campaign. For two months, detailed accounts and testimonies attempted to convey the hellish reality of the camps. Newspapers featured photographs of mass graves and emaciated deportees, and scenes of “pedagogy of horror,” often dominating front pages.
Journalists played a crucial role in shaping the initial public perception of the Holocaust. Their reports, filled with emotion and outrage, helped fix a first image of the deportation. However, some articles veered towards sensationalism, especially as the concentration camp universe was a seemingly endless journey into horror.
Over the weeks, and with the onset of the first trials, articles became more analytical, though they still struggled to provide a deep understanding of the concentration camp system. The information helped convey the “shock” of discovering the camps, inciting indignation and compassion for the deportees. However, it fell short in grasping the diversity of experiences among the victims.
The difficulty in comprehending the concentration camp system also reflected the chaotic conditions within the camps and the disorder of repatriations. Journalists who had experienced deportation themselves, attempted to convey a more complex viewpoint, introducing the idea that not all repatriates had undergone the same ordeals.
The media coverage of the liberation of the camps contributed significantly to the initial understanding of the Holocaust. While it may not have fully captured the complexity of the concentration camp system, it played a vital role in documenting the immediate aftermath of the camps’ liberation and shaping public awareness of the Holocaust’s atrocities.
The pedagogy of horror
“The Pedagogy of Horror” related to methods employed by the Allied forces to reveal the extent of Nazi atrocities in concentration and extermination camps during and after World War II.
In numerous camps, the Allies organized visits for German and Austrian civilians. These tours were designed to inform and potentially reeducate the local population, but they also carried an element of retribution. Mass graves were often left untouched, and survivors were enlisted to provide firsthand accounts. The punitive aspect led the Allies to compel Germans to participate in exhuming and burying human remains. These scenes of “pedagogy of horror” were extensively photographed and published in the press, accompanied by accusatory and sometimes vengeful commentary.
Moving images played a significant role in this educational approach. In the United States, special units like the SPECOU (Special Coverage Unit) were organized within the armed forces to cover various war episodes, including the liberation of Europe. These units also had the mission of collecting evidence of Nazi crimes, which became a priority after the discovery of concentration camps. Such documentaries were used in the Nuremberg Trials and for the political reeducation of occupied countries.
On the Soviet side, army filmmakers tasked with supplying war newsreels encountered mass death earlier, first through the “Holocaust by bullets” and then in the discovery of extermination camps, which were almost entirely emptied of their occupants. While their objectives differed, focusing initially on mobilizing the nation against Nazi atrocities, the documents unearthed from Soviet archives since the early 1990s have contributed to renewing and enriching research on the liberation phase.
The post-war trials and denazification
After the war, Germany was divided into four zones of Allied occupation, each implementing its own approach to denazification. The Allied Control Council, in October 1946, categorized Nazis into five groups, ranging from major offenders to exonerated individuals. This process extended to all layers of society, including the economic, cultural, judicial, and governmental sectors. However, denazification faced challenges due to the Cold War, as the West viewed Nazis as lesser threats compared to communism. The first German chancellor of the new republic, Konrad Adenauer, favored integration over denazification, leading to many former Nazis retaining their positions.
The Nuremberg Trials, starting in 1945, marked the first major legal reckoning for high-ranking Nazi officials. Twenty-one defendants, including prominent figures like Hermann Göring and Joachim von Ribbentrop, were tried for crimes against humanity, war crimes, and conspiracy against peace. The trials revealed the extent of the Holocaust and other Nazi atrocities. Twelve defendants were sentenced to death, three received life imprisonment, four received prison terms, and three were acquitted. The trials set a precedent in international law and highlighted the need for accountability in cases of mass atrocity.
Following the main Nuremberg Trial, twelve more trials were organized by the American authorities, known as the Subsequent Nuremberg Trials. These trials focused on different aspects of the Nazi state, including industrialists, doctors, and SS officers. In total, 183 defendants were tried, resulting in various sentences, from imprisonment to death.
The Frankfurt Auschwitz Trials, held from December 1963 to August 1965, prosecuted twenty-two Nazi personnel from the Auschwitz Camp Complex. Initiated in 1958, the trials involved extensive evidence review and led to charges against twenty-two individuals, though two died before the trial. Conducted under German state law, the accused faced charges of murder or complicity in murder. Outcomes varied: two were acquitted, twelve received three to ten years in prison, and six were sentenced to life imprisonment.
In the aftermath of World War II, most trials for Nazi perpetrators and collaborators were conducted individually rather than in large groups like the Nuremberg or Auschwitz trials. European courts sentenced about 100,000 Germans and Austrians for wartime crimes, while Soviet courts convicted around 26,000 for their actions during the Third Reich.
Additionally, European and Soviet courts prosecuted local collaborators extensively. In Hungary, around 26,000 people were convicted for treason, war crimes, or crimes against humanity. Czechoslovakia saw about 32,000 people tried for Nazi collaboration. The widespread nature of collaboration made it challenging to prosecute all collaborators; for instance, in the Netherlands, up to 500,000 people (5% of the population) were estimated to have collaborated with the Nazis.
Trials for Nazi crimes have continued into the 21st century, albeit in smaller numbers. A notable case was that of John Demjanjuk in 2011, who was charged and found responsible for mass murder at Sobibor. This trial set a new precedent in Germany, where former Nazis were charged with mass murder rather than individual murders, making it easier to prosecute such crimes.