Allied War Crimes

Allied war crimes during World War II ex Wiki
QUOTE
The Western Allied nations claim that their militaries were directed
to observe the Geneva Conventions and believed to be conducting a just
war fought for defensive reasons. Violations of the conventions did
occur, however, including untried allegations about the bombing of
German and Japanese civilians and the forcible return of Soviet
citizens who had been collaborating with the Axis forces to the USSR
at the end of the war. It is claimed that the Allied countries did not
engage in mass terror or commit genocide[1], in spite of the fire
bombing of civilians in Dresden, Tokyo and other German and Japanese
towns and cities, plus the use of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and
Nagasaki. The military of the Soviet Union also frequently committed
war crimes, which are today known to have been at the direction of its
government. These crimes included waging wars of aggression, mass
murder of prisoners of war and repressing the population of conquered
countries.[1]
Europe
Air raids on civilian population
See also: Bombing of Dresden in World War II and Bombing of Tokyo

During the Second World War, the Allied aerial forces performed air
raids on civilian populations in Europe and over Japan. These actions
were retrospectively described as crimes by some historians,[2] and
viewed as such by leaders of the Axis Powers during the war itself,
despite their own similar actions. On 6 June 1944, at a conference of
top German leaders in Klessheim, the German Minister of Foreign
Affairs Joachim von Ribbentrop tried to introduce a resolution to
define air raids on civilians as acts of terror. However his motion
was rejected.[3]
Canada

During the fighting at Leonforte in July 1943, according to Mitcham
and von Stauffenberg in the book The Battle of Sicily, The Loyal
Edmonton Regiment killed captured German prisoners.[4][page needed]

C.P. Stacey, the Canadian official campaign historian, reports that on
14 April 1945 rumours had been spread that the popular commanding
officer of the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders of Canada had been
killed by a civilian sniper. This rumoured action resulted in the
Highlanders setting fire to civilian property within the town of
Friesoythe in an act of reprisal.[5] Stacey later wrote that the
Canadian troops first removed German civilians from their property
before setting the houses on fire; he commented that he was "glad to
say that [he] never heard of another such case".[6] It was later found
that German soldiers had in fact killed the Argyll's commander,
Lieutenant Colonel Frederick E. Wigle.[7]
France
Maquis

Following the Operation Dragoon landings in southern France and the
collapse of the German military occupation in August 1944, large
numbers of Germans could not escape from France and surrendered to the
French Forces of the Interior. The Resistance executed a few of the
Wehrmacht and most of the Gestapo or SS prisoners.[8]

The Maquis also executed 17 German prisoners of war at Saint-Julien-de-
Crempse (in the Dordogne region), on 10 September 1944, 14 of whom
have since been positively identified. The murders were revenge
killings for German murders of 17 local inhabitants of the village of
St. Julien on 3 August 1944, which were themselves reprisal killings
in response to Resistance activity in the St. Julien region, which was
home to an active Maquis cell.[9]
Moroccan Goumiers
See also: Marocchinate

French Moroccan troops of the French Expeditionary Corps, known as
Goumiers, committed mass crimes in Italy during and after the Battle
of Monte Cassino[10] and in Germany. According to European sources,
more than 12,000 civilians, above all young and old women, children,
were kidnapped, raped, or killed by Goumiers.[11] This is featured in
the Italian film La Ciociara (Two Women) with Sophia Loren.

Anthony Clayton in his book 'France, Soldiers, and Africa' (Brassey's
Defence Publishers, 1988) devotes several pages to the criminal
activities of the Goumiers, which he partially ascribes to the record
of what was considered normal practices in their homeland.
Yugoslavia
Armed conflict Perpetrator
Yugoslav Front Yugoslavian partisans
Incident Type of crime Persons
responsible Notes
Bleiburg tragedy War crimes, crimes against humanity (murder of
prisoners of war and civilians). No prosecutions. The victims were
Yugoslav collaborationist troops (ethnic Croats, Serbs, and Slovenes).
They were executed without trial in an act of vengeance for the
genocide committed by the pro-Axis collaborationist regimes (in
particular the Ustaše) installed by the Germans during the occupation
of Yugoslavia.[12]
Foibe massacres War crimes, crimes against humanity (murder of
prisoners of war and civilians). No prosecutions. Following Italy's
1943 armistice with the Allied powers, Yugoslav resistance forces
allegedly executed an unknown number of ethnic Italians accused of
collaboration.[13]
Vojvodina massacre War crimes, crimes against humanity (murder of
prisoners of war and civilians). No prosecutions. 1944–1945 killings
of ethnic Germans and Hungarians in Bačka, and Serb prisoners of war.
[14]
Kočevski Rog massacre War crimes, crimes against humanity (murder of
prisoners of war and civilians). No prosecutions. Massacres of
prisoners of war, and their families.[15]
Soviet Union
See also: Soviet war crimes

The Soviet Union had not signed the Geneva Convention of 1929 that
protected, and stated how prisoners of war should be treated. This
cast doubt on whether the Soviet treatment of Axis prisoners was
therefore a war crime, although prisoners "were [not] treated even
remotely in accordance with the Geneva Convention",[16] resulting in
the deaths of hundreds of thousands.[17] However, the Nuremberg
Tribunal rejected this as a general argument. The tribunal held that
the Hague Conventions (which the 1929 Geneva Convention did not
replace but only augmented, and unlike the 1929 convention were ones
that the Russian Empire had ratified) and other customary laws of war,
regarding the treatment of prisoners of war, were binding on all
nations in a conflict.[18][19][20]

Acts of mass rape and other war crimes were committed by Soviet troops
during the occupation of East Prussia (Danzig),[21][22][23][24] parts
of Pomerania and Silesia, during the Battle of Berlin,[25] and during
the Battle of Budapest.[citation needed]

Late in the war, Yugoslavia's Communist Partisans complained about the
rapes and looting committed by the Soviet Army while traversing their
country. Milovan Djilas later recalled Joseph Stalin's response,

"Does Djilas, who is himself a writer, not know what human
suffering and the human heart are? Can't he understand it if a soldier
who has crossed thousands of kilometers through blood and fire and
death has fun with a woman or takes some trifle?[26]

United Kingdom
See also: British war crimes#World War II

In violation of the Hague Conventions, British line of communication
troops conducted small-scale looting in Bayeux and Caen in France,
following their liberation, during Operation Overlord.[27] Rare
looting, rape and prisoner execution was committed by British soldiers
throughout the war.[28]

While "no agreement, treaty, convention or any other instrument
governing the protection of the civilian population or civilian
property" from aerial attack was adopted before the war[29] and Allied
forces concluded that an air attack on the German city of Dresden was
militarily justified on the grounds the city was defended.[30]
Historian Donald Bloxham claims that "the bombing of Dresden on 13–14
February 1945 was a war crime". He further argues that there was a
strong prima facie for trying Winston Churchill among others and that
there is theoretical case that he could have been found guilty. "This
should be a sobering thought. If, however it is also a startling one,
this is probably less the result of widespread understanding of the
nuance of international law and more because in the popular mind 'war
criminal', like 'paedophile' or 'terrorist', has developed into a
moral rather than a legal categorisation."[2]

The "London Cage", a MI19 prisoner of war facility in the UK during
and immediately after the war, was subject to allegations of torture.
[31]
United States
See also: United States war crimes#World_War_II
SS troops lined up against a wall on Dachau concentration camp's day
of liberation

Canicattì massacre: killing of Italian civilians by Lieutenant
Colonel McCaffrey. A confidential inquiry was made, but McCaffrey was
never charged with an offence relating to the incident. He died in
1954. This incident remained virtually unknown until Joseph S. Salemi
of New York University, whose father witnessed it, publicised it.[32]
[33]
The Dachau massacre: killing of German prisoners of war and
surrendering SS soldiers at the Dachau concentration camp.[34]
In the Biscari massacre, which consists of two instances of mass
murders, U.S. troops of the 45th Infantry Division killed roughly 75
prisoners of war, mostly Italian.[35][36]
Operation Teardrop: Eight of the surviving, captured crewmen from
the sunk German submarine U-546 were tortured by US military
personnel. Historian Philip K. Lundeberg has written that the beating
and torture of U-546's survivors was a singular atrocity motivated by
the interrogators' need to quickly get information on what the US
believed were potential missile attacks on the continental US by
German submarines.[37][38]

In the aftermath of the Malmedy massacre a written order from the HQ
of the 328th US Army Infantry Regiment, dated 21 December 1944,
stated: No SS troops or paratroopers will be taken prisoner but will
be shot on sight.[39] Major-General Raymond Hufft (U.S. Army) gave
instructions to his troops not to take prisoners when they crossed the
Rhine in 1945. "After the war, when he reflected on the war crimes he
authorized, he admitted, 'if the Germans had won, I would have been on
trial at Nuremberg instead of them.'"[40] Stephen Ambrose related:
"I've interviewed well over 1000 combat veterans. Only one of them
said he shot a prisoner... Perhaps as many as one-third of the
veterans...however, related incidents in which they saw other GIs
shooting unarmed German prisoners who had their hands up."[41]

Near the French village of Audouville-la-Hubert, 30 German Wehrmacht
prisoners [probably German Army soldiers] were massacred by U.S.
paratroopers.[42]

Frank Sheeran, who served in the 45th Infantry Division, later
recalled, When an officer would tell you to take a couple of German
prisoners back behind the line and for you to 'hurry back,' you did
what you had to do.[43]

Historian Peter Lieb has found that many US and Canadian units were
ordered to not take prisoners during the D-Day landings in Normandy.
If this view is correct it may explain the fate of 64 German prisoners
(out of 130 captured) who did not make it to the POW collecting point
on Omaha Beach on D-Day.[44]

According to an article in Der Spiegel by Klaus Wiegrefe, many
personal memoirs of Allied soldiers have been willfully ignored by
historians until now because they were at odds with the "Greatest
Generation" mythology surrounding World War II, but this has recently
started to change with books such as The Day of Battle by Rick
Atkinson where he describes Allied war crimes in Italy, and D-Day: The
Battle for Normandy, by Antony Beevor.[44]
Asia and the Pacific War
See also: Japanese prisoners of war in World War II and Japanese
prisoners of war in the Soviet Union

Allied soldiers[which?] in Pacific and Asian theatres sometimes killed
Japanese soldiers who were attempting to surrender or after they had
surrendered. A social historian of the Pacific War, John W. Dower,
states that "by the final years of the war against Japan, a truly
vicious cycle had developed in which the Japanese reluctance to
surrender had meshed horrifically with Allied disinterest in taking
prisoners."[45] Dower suggests that most Japanese personnel were told
that they would be "killed or tortured" if they fell into Allied hands
and, as a consequence, most of those faced with defeat on the
battlefield fought to the death or committed suicide.[46] In addition,
it was held to be shamefully disgraceful for a Japanese soldier to
surrender, leading many to suicide or fight to the death regardless of
beliefs concerning their possible treatment as POWs. In fact, the
Japanese Field Service Code said that surrender was not permissible.
[47]

And while it was "not official policy" for Allied personnel to take no
prisoners, "over wide reaches of the Asian battleground it was
everyday practice."[48] There were also widespread reports at the time
of Japanese prisoners killing Allied medical personnel and guards with
concealed weapons after surrendering, leading many Allied soldiers to
conclude that taking prisoners was too risky.[49]

4 March 1943, during the Battle of the Bismarck Sea, General George
Kenney ordered Allied patrol boats and aircraft to attack Japanese
rescue vessels, as well as the survivors from the sunken vessels on
life rafts and swimming or floating in the sea. This was later
justified on the grounds that rescued servicemen would have been
rapidly landed at their military destination and promptly returned to
active service.[50] These orders violated the Hague Convention of
1907, which banned the killing of shipwreck survivors under any
circumstances.[51]
China

R. J. Rummel states that there is little information regarding the
general treatment of Japanese prisoners taken by Chinese Nationalist
forces during the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937–45).[52] However,
Chinese civilians and conscripts, as well as Japanese civilians, were
maltreated by Chinese soldiers. Rummel claims that Chinese peasants
"often had no less to fear from their own soldiers than they did from
the Japanese."[53] He also wrote that, in some intakes of Nationalist
conscripts, 90% died from disease, starvation or violence, before they
had even commenced training.[54] In "The Birth of Communist China",
C.P. Fitzgerald describes China under the rule of KMT thus: “the
Chinese people groaned under a regime Fascist in every quality except
efficiency.”[55]

Examples of war crimes committed by Chinese forces include:

in 1937 near Shanghai, the killing, torture and assault of
Japanese POWs and Chinese civilians accused of collaboration, were
recorded in photographs taken by Swiss businessman Tom Simmen.[56] (In
1996, Simmen's son released the pictures, showing Nationalist Chinese
soldiers committing summary executions by decapitation and shooting,
as well as public torture.)
the Tungchow Mutiny of August 1937; Chinese soldiers recruited by
Japan mutinied and switched sides in Tōngzhōu, Beijing, before
attacking Japanese civilians and killing 280.[52]
Nationalist troops in Hubei Province, during May 1943, ordered
whole towns to evacuate and then "plundered" them; any civilians who
refused and/or were unable to leave, were killed.[53]

Australia
According to Mark Johnston, "the killing of unarmed Japanese was
common" and Australian command tried to put pressure on troops to
actually take prisoners, but the troops proved reluctant.[57] When
prisoners were indeed taken "it often proved difficult to prevent them
from killing captured Japanese before they could be interrogated".[58]
According to Johnston, as a consequence of this type of behavior;
"Some Japanese soldiers were almost certainly deterred from
surrendering to Australians".[58]

Major General Paul Cullen indicated that the killing of Japanese
prisoners in the Kokoda Track Campaign was not uncommon. In one
instance he recalled during the battle at Gorari that "the leading
platoon captured five or seven Japanese and moved on to the next
battle. The next platoon came along and bayoneted these Japanese."[59]
He also stated that he found the killings understandable but that it
had left him feeling guilty.
United Kingdom & British India
[icon] This section requires expansion. (June 2012)
United States
See also: United States war crimes#World War II

American soldiers in the Pacific often deliberately killed Japanese
soldiers who had surrendered. According to Richard Aldrich, who has
published a study of the diaries kept by United States and Australian
soldiers, they sometimes massacred prisoners of war.[60] Dower states
that in "many instances ... Japanese who did become prisoners were
killed on the spot or en route to prison compounds."[48] According to
Aldrich it was common practice for U.S. troops not to take prisoners.
[61] This analysis is supported by British historian Niall Ferguson,
[62] who also says that, in 1943, "a secret [U.S.] intelligence report
noted that only the promise of ice cream and three days leave
would ... induce American troops not to kill surrendering
Japanese."[62]

Ferguson states such practices played a role in the ratio of Japanese
prisoners to dead being 1:100 in late 1944. That same year, efforts
were taken by Allied high commanders to suppress "take no prisoners"
attitudes,[62] among their own personnel (as these were affecting
intelligence gathering) and to encourage Japanese soldiers to
surrender. Ferguson adds that measures by Allied commanders to improve
the ratio of Japanese prisoners to Japanese dead, resulted in it
reaching 1:7, by mid-1945. Nevertheless, taking no prisoners was still
standard practice among U.S. troops at the Battle of Okinawa, in April–
June 1945.[62]

Ulrich Straus, a U.S. Japanologist, suggests that frontline troops
intensely hated Japanese military personnel and were "not easily
persuaded" to take or protect prisoners, as they believed that Allied
personnel who surrendered, got "no mercy" from the Japanese.[63]
Allied soldiers believed that Japanese soldiers were inclined to feign
surrender, in order to make surprise attacks.[63] Therefore, according
to Straus, "Senior officers opposed the taking of prisoners on the
grounds that it needlessly exposed American troops to risks..."[63]
When prisoners nevertheless were taken at Gualdacanal, interrogator
Army Captain Burden noted that many times these were shot during
transport because "it was too much bother to take him in".[64]

Ferguson suggests that "it was not only the fear of disciplinary
action or of dishonor that deterred German and Japanese soldiers from
surrendering. More important for most soldiers was the perception that
prisoners would be killed by the enemy anyway, and so one might as
well fight on."[62]

U.S. historian James J. Weingartner attributes the very low number of
Japanese in U.S. POW compounds to two important factors, a Japanese
reluctance to surrender and a widespread American "conviction that the
Japanese were "animals" or "subhuman'" and unworthy of the normal
treatment accorded to POWs.[65] The latter reason is supported by
Ferguson, who says that "Allied troops often saw the Japanese in the
same way that Germans regarded Russians—as Untermenschen."[62]
Mutilation of Japanese war dead
Main article: American mutilation of Japanese war dead
A U.S. sailor with a Japanese skull on board USS PT-341

Some Allied soldiers collected Japanese body parts. The incidence of
this by American personnel occurred on "a scale large enough to
concern the Allied military authorities throughout the conflict and
was widely reported and commented on in the American and Japanese
wartime press."[66]

The collection of Japanese body parts began quite early in the war,
prompting a September 1942 order for disciplinary action against such
souvenir taking.[66] Harrison concludes that, since this was the first
real opportunity to take such items (the Battle of Guadalcanal),
"[c]learly, the collection of body parts on a scale large enough to
concern the military authorities had started as soon as the first
living or dead Japanese bodies were encountered."[66]

When Japanese remains were repatriated from the Mariana Islands after
the war, roughly 60 percent were missing their skulls.[66]

In a 13 June 1944 memorandum, the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General,
(JAG) Major General Myron C. Cramer, asserted that "such atrocious and
brutal policies," were both "repugnant to the sensibilities of all
civilized people"[65] and also violations of the Geneva Convention for
the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armies in
the Field, which stated that: "After each engagement, the belligerent
who remains in possession of the field shall take measures to search
for wounded and the dead and to protect them from robbery and ill
treatment."[67] Cramer recommended the distribution to all commanders
of a directive ordering them to prohibit the misuse of enemy body
parts.[65]

These practices were in addition also in violation of the unwritten
customary rules of land warfare and could lead to the death penalty.
[65] The U.S. Navy JAG mirrored that opinion one week later, and also
added that "the atrocious conduct of which some US personnel were
guilty could lead to retaliation by the Japanese which would be
justified under international law".[65]
Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Main article: Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

In 1963, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the
subject of a judicial review in Ryuichi Shimoda et al. v. The State.
[68] The District Court of Tokyo declined to rule on the legality of
nuclear weapons in general, but found that "the attacks upon Hiroshima
and Nagasaki caused such severe and indiscriminate suffering that they
did violate the most basic legal principles governing the conduct of
war."[69] Francisco Gómez points out in an article published in the
International Review of the Red Cross that, with respect to the "anti-
city" or "blitz" strategy, that "in examining these events in the
light of international humanitarian law, it should be borne in mind
that during the Second World War there was no agreement, treaty,
convention or any other instrument governing the protection of the
civilian population or civilian property."[70] The possibility that
attacks like the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings could be considered
war crimes is one of the reasons given by John R. Bolton for the
United States not agreeing to be bound by the Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court[71] while he was Undersecretary of State
for Arms Control and International Security, although they would not
be prosecutable due to their having occurred prior to the ratification
of the treaty.
Rape
Main articles: Rape during the occupation of Japan and War rape

It has been claimed that some U.S. soldiers raped Okinawan women
during the Battle of Okinawa in 1945.[72]

Okinawan historian Oshiro Masayasu (former director of the Okinawa
Prefectural Historical Archives) writes based on several years of
research:

Soon after the U.S. Marines landed, all the women of a village on
Motobu Peninsula fell into the hands of American soldiers. At the
time, there were only women, children and old people in the village,
as all the young men had been mobilized for the war. Soon after
landing, the Marines "mopped up" the entire village, but found no
signs of Japanese forces. Taking advantage of the situation, they
started "hunting for women" in broad daylight and those who were
hiding in the village or nearby air raid shelters were dragged out one
after another.[73]

However, Japanese civilians "were often surprised at the comparatively
humane treatment they received from the American enemy."[74][75]
According to Islands of Discontent: Okinawan Responses to Japanese and
American Power by Mark Selden, the Americans "did not pursue a policy
of torture, rape, and murder of civilians as Japanese military
officials had warned."[76]

There were also 1,336 reported rapes during the first 10 days of the
occupation of Kanagawa prefecture after the Japanese surrender.[72]
Comparative death rates of POWs

According to James D. Morrow, "Death rates of POWs held is one measure
of adherence to the standards of the treaties because substandard
treatment leads to death of prisoners." The "democratic states
generally provide good treatment of POWs".[77]
Held by Axis powers

Chinese POWs held by Japan: 56 reported survivors at the end of
the war[78]
U.S. and British Commonwealth POWs held by Germany: ~4%[77]
Soviet POWs held by Germany: 57.5%[62]
Western Allied POWs held by Japan: 27%[79] (Figures for Japan may
be misleading though, as sources indicate that either 10,800[80] or
19,000[81] of 35,756 fatalities among Allied POW's were from "friendly
fire" at sea when their transport ships were sunk. Nonetheless, the
Geneva convention required the labeling of such craft as POW ships,
which the Japanese neglected to do.)

Held by the Allies

German POWs in East European (not including the Soviet Union)
hands 32.9%[62]
German soldiers held by Soviet Union: 15–33% (14.7% in The
Dictators by Richard Overy, 35.8% in Ferguson)[62]
Japanese POWs held by Soviet Union: 10%[citation needed]
German POWs in British hands 0.03%[62]
German POWs in American hands 0.15%[62]
German POWs in French hands 2.58%[62]
Japanese POWs held by U.S.: relatively low, mainly suicides
according to James D. Morrow.[82]
Japanese POWs in Chinese hands: 24%[citation needed]

Official claims that the death rate of German POWs in American and
British hands, were under 1% has been disputed. For comparison,
British and U.S. post-war civilian mortality rates were considerably
higher. Anglo American troops held in German POW camps suffered a very
low mortality rate of 4% which was praised by the ICRC who credited it
to the treatment of allied prisoners by the German military.[83]
Novelist James Bacque claims an analysis of records supports a German
POW death rate of over 25%,[84] although his figures have been
disputed by academics, who describe Bacque's figures as "simply
impossible".[85] A Panel of historians concluded that Bacque is a
Canadian novelist with no previous historical research or writing
experience,[86] and his writing is "seriously — nay, spectacularly —
flawed in its most fundamental aspects.".[87]
Summary table
Origin
USSR US
& UK ROC Western Allies Nazi Germany Japan
Held by Soviet Union – – – – 14.70–35.80% 10.00%
United Kingdom – – – – 0.03%
United States – – – – 0.15% varying
France – – – – 2.58%
East European – – – – 32.90%
Nazi Germany 57.50% 4.00% – –
Japan not documented 27.00% – –
Portrayal
Holocaust denial literature

The focus on supposed Allied atrocities during the war has been a
theme in Holocaust denial literature, particularly in countries where
outright denial of the Holocaust is illegal.[88] According to
historian Deborah Lipstadt, the concept of "comparable Allied wrongs",
such as the post-war expulsions and Allied war crimes, is at the
center of, and a continuously repeated theme of, contemporary
Holocaust denial; phenomenon she calls "immoral equivalencies".[89]
Japanese neo-nationalists

Japanese neo-nationalists argue that Allied war crimes and the
shortcomings of the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal were equivalent to the
war crimes committed by Japanese forces during the war[citation
needed]. American historian John W. Dower has written that this
position is "a kind of historiographic cancellation of immorality—as
if the transgressions of others exonerate one's own crimes".[90] While
right-wing forces in Japan have tried to deny or re-write the war-time
history, they have been unsuccessful due to pressure from both within
and from outside Japan.[91]
See also
Portal icon World War II portal

(you must go to site[top of page] to get to the following sites).
Bleiburg massacre
Serbian partisans' executions 1944–1945
Foibe massacres
List of massacres
Victor's justice
Forced labor of Germans in the Soviet Union
Soviet partisans, atrocities against civilians in Finland
Taken by Force (book)
Churchill's advocacy of chemical strike against German cities
}