He was in command of the Emden in the Indian Ocean when the Nazis seized power. Granted that Doenitz merely trained his submarines, can he escape the charge of sharing in the common plan or conspiracy as one of the Nazi group who conspired to bring on the war? Politically, his case seems a strong one. To one who witnessed the trial and observed the faith of the defendant in his submarines and in the inevitability of their unfettered employment against merchant shipping once war came, it is difficult to believe that the could have kept this enthusiasm to himself. What the evidence failed to show was whether Doenitz was, as he consistently claimed, content merely to carry out his duty to perfect his squadrons against all general war contingencies, or whether he actually urged secret plans for their ruthless employment. The fact that the prosecution had at its disposal almost the entire archives of the German Navy, which Doenitz said were purposely left for them, seems to indicated either that all records of more “offensive” preparations were completely destroyed, or, what is more likely, that Doenitz was telling the truth. Under direct examination, Doenitz readily admitted that he prepared his flotilla in the tactics of commerce warfare, but commerce warfare under the prewar German prize ordinance, which embodied the limitations of summons and of safeguarding crew and passengers as laid down in the London Naval Treaty. The defense attempted to prove that in all this Doenitz was merely a naval officer faithful to his trust and obeying the orders of his political superiors. The wording of the indictment and the outline of the case against Doenitz charge him with preparations for offensive war from the very fact that he prepared the U-boat arm, planned its use in war, dictated its methods of warfare, and sent it to its war stations in the weeks immediately preceding the outbreak of hostilities. It involves the problem of how far the soldier can go in preparation of war without inciting the very war against which he claims to be preparing. The political charge is especially interesting. During the last weeks of the war, as Hitler’s successor, he stands charged with ordering the continuation of hopeless war. On the military level, first in the position of flag officer submarines, and after 30 January 1943 as commander in chief of the German Navy, he stands charged with authorizing, directing, and participating in war crimes and crimes against humanity, especially against persons and property on the high seas. On the political level he stands charged with promoting the preparation for aggressive war and participating in the planning of war of aggression in violation of treaties. The charges against Grand Admiral Karl Doenitz fall into two categories. While Raeder and Doenitz are generally charged with the same offenses, the specific acts to which they have to answer are for the most part different. It is submitted in this procedure, however, that Grand Admiral Karl Doenitz, Grand Admiral Erich Raeder, Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel, and Colonel General Alfred Jodl are not being tried for what they did as soldiers in representing their country in battle, but for what they did in precipitating an unnecessary war, and for the manner in which they ordered, directed, and conducted that war. No soldier has ever been called before an international tribunal to give an account of his military deeds on a battlefield. The profession of arms is an honorable one and is recognized by all nations. There exists one distinct anomaly in the Nuremberg trials and that is the prosecution of military persons.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |