The malmedy massacre

[Sarge]

Originally Posted by Klaus

Don't get me wrong: I don't say that the SS didn't murder them. But what exactly happend in Dunkirk?

A couple of snippets here

Massacres and Atrocities of WWII in Western Europe

[Klaus]

Thaks very much. Very informative.

[Spinechicken]

First, this wasn't the "norm" for German behavior on the Western Front. Even on the Eastern Front they generally exploited the prisoners or let them die from exposure. Those that they outright executed they often believed to be communist party members/commisars or had some other political reason for doing so.

The following doesn't come from the best source, but it's late at night and it's the nearest. This is in regard to fighting in the Ukraine in 1941:

From Ripley, Tim, Hitler's Praetorians (Spellmount, 2004)

"When six men of the Leibstandarte's reconnaissance battalion were overrun and executed by Soviet troops, [Sepp] Dietrich was enraged and ordered every Russian prisoner caputred over a four-day period to be shot. More than 4,000 Russians were killed in cold-blood by the Liebstandarte."-p.71

I doubt that many of those 4,000 men were shot because they were Communist party members. Eastern Front was no quarter asked, no quarter given.

Even on the Western Front, the Waffen-SS were hardly pure. Most of us will know of the execution of Canadian prisioners by the 12th SS Hitlerjugend, supposedly because British troops had beaten several HJ officers to death. Indeed, the fighting between the Canadians and HJ in Normandy was some of the most ruthless and bloody on the Western Front. I'm not sure that many prisoners were taken then.

Of course, there were exceptions, such as the 9th SS Division's treatment of the 1st British Airborne Division prisoners they took after the fall of Arnhem, who were surprised at how well they were treated. Sadly, this seems to be a relatively one-off case.

-SC

[Jim O]

It still was not the "norm" on the western front. Most prisoners taken actually came home. Execution was the exception, even at the hands of the SS.

The story on the eastern front was much different, and while there were mass executions there, the specific policy was to immediately execute political officers as a matter of course. Others were mostly starved and worked to death (much of the blame for that can be laid squarely at the feet of Stalin and his refusal to abide by Geneva Convention but that is another topic). Those who could not keep up with forced "death marches" were executed as a matter of policy.

pows2.jpg

Colonel Erwin Lahousen, a German foreign intelligence officer, wrote in October 1941 that "The columns of [Soviet] prisoners of war moving on the roads make an idiotic impression like herds of animals. The guard details ... can only maintain some semblance of order ... by using physical force. Because of the physical exertion of the marches, the meager diet and poor conditions in the quarters in individual camps, prisoners of war often break down [see photo above], are then carried by their fellow-soldiers or are left lying. The 6th Army has given orders that all prisoners of war who break down are to be executed. Unfortunately, this is done on the road, even in towns ..." (Quoted in The Hamburg Institute for Social Research, The German Army and Genocide: Crimes Against War Prisoners, Jews, and Other Civilians, 1939-1944 [New York: The New Press, 1999], pp. 100, 142.)

Below is a photo of an open air POW camp full of Soviet prisoners in 1941. No doubt most never came home, dying of starvation while in the hands of their captors.
soviet3.jpg

[Sarge]

Originally Posted by Jim O

The story on the eastern front was much different, and while there were mass executions there, the specific policy was to immediately execute political officers as a matter of course. Others were mostly starved and worked to death (much of the blame for that can be laid squarely at the feet of Stalin and his refusal to abide by Geneva Convention but that is another topic).

I think the blame can be shared with the Nazis who regarded the Slavs as sub-humans [my bold].

[Jim O]

Originally Posted by Sarge

I think the blame can be shared with the Nazis who regarded the Slavs as sub-humans [my bold].

While this is true there were times when the Germans asked the Protecting Authority (the Swiss Red Cross) to intervene and their efforts were rebuffed by Stalin.

See "Forced Repatriation to the Soviet Union: The Secret Betrayal", by Nikolai Tolstoy, December 1988, IMPRIMUS

"During World War I, Russian prisoners received the same treatment as the British, French and American troops; they were all signatories of the Hague Convention. Ironically, it was not Imperial Russia under Czar Nicholas II [1868-1918; r. 1894-1917] which refused to be bound by the Hague agreement but the new Soviet regime which supplanted it in 1917. Twelve years later, the world powers reached a more detailed agreement, the Geneva Convention, but the Soviets remained aloof. Throughout World War II, Russian POWs were completely unprotected. Except on a few rare occasions, the Red Cross was forbidden to enter the camps and Stalin refused to discuss the issue even though Germany urged Red Cross intervention."

Stalin clearly did not care about the state of Soviet prisoners though it's unclear why. I have several theories including that he didn't want to offer reciprocal treatment to German POW's, he regarded those who surrendered as cowards and traitors, and he wanted to use the mistreatment of Soviet prisoners to foment unrest among them to keep the Nazis "busy" guarding them, and for propaganda.

[Sarge]

I agree that he treated Soviet prisoners as cowards and suspect. Many of the returning POW's went straight to the Gulag after the war and many others while being returned to civilian life had their cards marked and for many years could not get any but the most menial jobs.

The Soviets suspected anyone who had been in the West, no matter what condition they were found in.

[Klaus]

Do you think, that the returning POW from the west were considered a threat to the communist ideology?

[Jim O]

Originally Posted by Klaus

Do you think, that the returning POW from the west were considered a threat to the communist ideology?

I wouldn't but that's Stalin we're talking about. He was rather paranoid. But considering how badly they were treated while in captivity I would think they woould be grateful for repatriation and for having survived.

[Klaus]

It sounds like they got from one prison to the other. You surrvive the german prison and after that the russians play with your balls.