“Wannsee: the way to the final solution of the Jewish question”.

[yankeedoodle]

"Wannsee: the way to the final solution of the Jewish question".
by John Wear
https://codoh.com/library/document/wannsee-o-caminho-para-a-solucao-final-da-questao/pt/

"Today, the minutes of the Wannsee Conference are seen as synonymous with the mass murder of European Jews, in cold blood, murder that was carried out on an industrial scale, and that was bureaucratically planned and organized. This enigmatic document is evidence of the ideological drive of the National Socialist system to proceed with the destruction of European Jews, having been ruthlessly executed under the orders of the highest authorities of the regime. [...] The minutes of the minutes are unique because, more than any other document, they demonstrate with complete clarity the decision-making process that led to the murder of European Jews".

This essay discusses whether the minutes of these minutes actually document "with complete clarity" the decision-making process that led to the occurrence of the so-called Holocaust.

Historical context

Initially, the History of the Holocaust assumed that Germany had a plan, or program, to exterminate European Jews. In the 1961 edition of The Destruction of European Jews, Raul Hilberg wrote that, in 1941, Hitler issued two orders for the extermination of the Jews. [2] However, although the Allies captured most of the National Socialist government records intact, as well as those from the concentration camps, no orders have been found that intended to murder all European Jews.

In the 1985 revised edition of Hilberg's book, all references to such extermination orders that Hitler allegedly had carried out were removed. American historian Christopher Browning, commenting on the revised edition of The Destruction of European Jews, wrote: [3]

"In this new edition, all references in the text relating to a decision, or order by Hitler, for the 'Final Solution' have been systematically deleted. Inserted at the end of a single footnote is the following lone reference: 'The chronology and circumstances point to a decision by Hitler before the end of the summer of 1941.' In Hilberg's new edition, Hitler's decisions and orders are not documented."

When asked in 1983 how the extermination of European Jews took place without an order, Hilberg replied: [4]

"What began in 1941 was a process of destruction not planned in advance, nor centrally organized by any agency. There was no project, nor budget, for mass destruction measures. These measurements were taken step by step, one step at a time. Thus, it came about not so much through an elaborate plan, to be executed, but rather through an incredible meeting of minds, that is, a mental consensus shared by a large group of bureaucrats."

On January 16, 1985, during the hearing of Ernst Zündel's first trial in Toronto, Raul Hilberg confirmed that he had said those words. [5] Thus, Hilberg asserted that the genocide of European Jews was not carried out by a plan, or by way of an order, but rather by way of a mental harmony between the different German bureaucrats, even though they were distant from each other.

Other historians have acknowledged that no documents of an alleged plan by Germany to exterminate European Jews have ever been found. The French Jewish historian Leon Poliakov, in his landmark work on the Holocaust, stated that "...the campaign to exterminate the Jews, as regards its conception as well as many other essential aspects, remains shrouded in opacity". Poliakov added that no documents, about a plan to exterminate the Jews, have ever been found because "perhaps none ever existed". [6] The British historian Ian Kershaw stated, when declassifying the Soviet archives in the early 1990s, that [7]"As might be expected, Hitler's written order, which formalized the 'Final Solution', has never been found. The presumption that a single, written, formally issued order has long since been dismissed by most of Historians."

Many Holocaust advocates claim that the Wannsee Conference was the beginning of a program to systematically exterminate the Jews of Europe. Since there is no explicit written order to exterminate European Jews, the Wannsee Conference became unavoidable in the attempt of historians of the established system to want to document the German program of genocide against the Jews of Europe.

However, even some leading Jewish historians recognize that this conference does not prove the existence of an extermination program. Instead, German policy was to evacuate Jews to the East. For example, Israeli Historian of the "Holocaust" Yehuda Bauer stated:

"The public still periodically repeats the insane story that it was at Wannsee that the systematic extermination of the Jews was instituted."

Bauer also said that Wannsee was a meeting, and "it was hardly a conference". "Little of what was decided there was carried out in detail". [8]

Similarly, the Israeli Historian of the "Holocaust" Leni Yahil stated in relation to the Wannsee Conference [9] :

"It is often assumed that the decision to initiate the Final Solution was made at this time, but this is not the case."

The Wannsee Conference

Reinhard Heydrich sent an invitation, on November 29, 1941, to several top German officials to participate in a meeting designed to organize and prepare the practical elements and materials necessary for a total solution of the Jewish question in Europe. The meeting was initially planned to take place on December 9, 1941. However, wartime circumstances forced Heydrich to postpone this meeting for a few days to January 20, 1942. [10 ]

The 15 men who attended the Wannsee Conference included 10 university graduates, nine of whom were qualified lawyers, eight of whom held doctorates. [11] Longerich divides the participants of the Wannsee Conference into three categories: 1) representatives of the "central authorities" (mainly state) of the Reich; 2) representatives of the civil occupation authorities (General Government and the Ministry for Eastern Affairs); and 3) SS officials representing the hierarchy, or delegations, of the SS in the occupied territories. [12]

The members of this first group – the representatives of the "central authorities" – were mainly senior officials, with higher education and active, long-standing National Socialists.

This group included Martin Luther, undersecretary and department head of the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Secretary of State Dr. Wilhelm Stuckart, who represented the Ministry of Internal Affairs; Erich Neumann, Secretary of State for the Quadrennial Plan Office; Secretary of State Dr. Roland Freisler of the Ministry of Justice and the Director General of the Ministry of the Reich Chancellery Friedrich Kritzinger. [13]

The second group of institutions represented, at the Wannsee Conference, consisted of representatives of civil occupation authorities in Poland and the Soviet Union. The Ministry of the occupied Eastern Territories, under Alfred Rosenberg, was responsible for the Soviet Union. He was represented at the conference by Rosenberg's permanent associate, Dr. Alfred Meyer, and by Dr. Georg Leibbrandt, Head of Main Department I (Political) of the Ministry of Eastern Affairs. The Secretary of State, Dr. Josef Bühler, represented the General Government of Poland at the conference. [14]

The third group at the Wannsee Conference consisted mainly of high-ranking SS soldiers. This group included Reinhard Heydrich, who had convened the meeting, and was head of the RSHA (Reich Central Security Office), which brought together the Gestapo, the Criminal Affairs Police, the Foreign Intelligence Services and the Security Services. Also present were Otto Hofmann, head of the Office of the Central Service for Race and Settlement; Adolf Eichmann and Heinrich Müller as representatives of the RSHA; Dr. Karl Georg Eberhard Schöngarth, Commander of the General Government Security Police; Dr. Rudolf Lange, Commander of the Security Police and Security Service in Latvia and Dr. Gerhard Klopher, State Secretary of the Party Chancellery. [15]

Heydrich informed Heinrich Himmler by telephone the day after the Wannsee Conference of the most important results of the meeting. He also sent letters a few days later to several German officials stressing his commitment to carrying out the tasks assigned to him as quickly as possible. [16]

Adolf Eichmann supposedly wrote the minutes of the Wannsee Conference meeting, which were later approved by Reinhard Heydrich. Of the 30 original productions of this act, only copy number 16 was found. This copy, which was discovered by the Allies in March 1947, during the search for German documents, was presented as evidence in the so-called Wilhelmstrasse Judgment. The minutes of this meeting comprise 15 pages, summarizing what was said at the conference and, therefore, are not a detailed transcription of what happened. According to Eichmann, the meeting lasted only an hour to an hour and a half. [17]

Longerich writes:
"We must base our reading of the 'minutes' on the assumption that it is not a direct reproduction of what was said, but a document summarizing the main lines of discussion and decisions taken from the point of view of the Reich Security Main Office ( RSHA). "

He also states that it is unclear whether the underlinings that are visible in the typewritten text are the work of the recipient of the minutes or were added later, after 1945. [18]

The minutes of the Wannsee Conference mention nothing about a Jewish extermination program. Rather, the aim was to exclude Jews:  a) from all sectors of German life and b) from the living space of the German nation.

The minutes declare, in this regard, that: [19]
"As the only viable temporary measure to achieve these goals, Jewish emigration from the territory of the Reich must be accelerated and methodically pursued."

German policy was to evacuate Jews to the East, not to exterminate them.

Nowhere in the text of the Wannsee Act is the genocide of Jews discussed or planned. Nowhere is there any talk of establishing death camps or allocating financial resources. Likewise, nowhere does it refer to the building materials needed for the death camps. The Wannsee minutes never mention gas chambers, gas trucks, shootings or any other genocidal plot, similar to allegations made after the end of the War. The Wannsee Act also allowed specific exceptions to the Jewish evacuation. These exceptions included German Jews, severely disabled World War I veterans, Jews with war decorations (Iron Cross First Class), and all Jews over the age of 65. These Jews should be sent to ghettos for elderly Jews, like the one in Theresienstadt.[20]

British historian David Irving was asked by the prosecutor at the Ernst Zündel trial in 1988 whether he thought the Wannsee Conference was a conference to discuss the extermination of European Jews. Irving testified: [21]

"There is no explicit reference to the extermination of Europe's Jews in the Wannsee Conference and, more importantly, in any of the other documents in this archive. We cannot interpret documents out of context. [...] In my opinion, the importance of this document has been inflated by irresponsible historians who probably did not read the document."

German judge Dr. Wilhelm Stäglich also questioned the authenticity of the Wannsee Conference minutes. Stäglich noted that these minutes bear neither an official stamp nor a date. The signature was written with an ordinary typewriter on small sheets of paper. Stäglich wrote: [22]

"What draws attention in the document, as it is reproduced there, is that it does not bear the name of the body, nor the serial number under which the official record of the processes would have been kept by the body that initiated them. This is completely at odds with official procedures and is all the more incomprehensible because it is stamped 'Geheime Reichssache' ('Top Secret'). We can only say that any 'official record' of government decisions, without a file number, or even with an administrative identification – especially a document classified as 'Top Secret' – should be viewed with the utmost skepticism...

While it is not known whether the document is truly a forgery, I am convinced that some segments of certain paragraphs were later added, others deleted, or otherwise altered to suit the purposes of the Nuremberg trials and the kind of 'Historiography' that developed out of these arrangements."

Extermination through work

Longerich uses the following two paragraphs from the Wannsee Act to try to prove a Germanic program of extermination of European Jews: [23]

"As part of the final solution, Jews will now be sent to work in the East, in an appropriate manner and under adequate supervision. Jews able to work will be taken to these territories in large working groups. Men and women will be divided and forced to build roads, during which the majority will no doubt naturally succumb to physical exertion.

The remaining Jews, those who survive, undoubtedly the toughest among them, will have to be treated accordingly, since, given the process of natural selection, they would, if freed, be the germ of a new Jewish regeneration (see the episodes of History and what they show us). "

Longerich wrote that the term "natural death" in this passage means death on a large scale as a result of inhumane working conditions. He wrote that not only would those who survived forced labor be murdered, in an unspecified manner, but also the rest of the Jews deemed unfit for work, in other words, the women and children, would not escape this mass murder either. Longerich further asserts that the separation of men from women was designed to prevent any future offspring. [24]

These are the only two ambivalent paragraphs in the Wannsee minutes that orthodox historians of the system, such as Longerich, insist on highlighting. Germar Rudolf wrote about these two paragraphs: [25]

"But it is worth reading carefully once more: the remaining population will be the result of 'natural' selection, at the end of this forced labor project, during this forced migration to the East. Nothing is said here about any murder during this process. Only when this project ends, and possibly after the end of the war, does the question of some kind of "special treatment" arise. How this would be put into practice is not dealt with in this Protocol, as that was obviously a question to be asked in the distant future."

Rudolf wrote that it is not true that the National Socialist regime was fundamentally opposed to a Jewish revival. In fact, before the outbreak of war with the Soviet Union, there were numerous projects in Germany aimed at facilitating a new beginning for Jews after having emigrated from the German sphere of influence. There are also documents that indicate that it was planned, after the war was over, to expel the Jews from Europe for a new start in another territory. This only makes sense if the Jews who survived forced labor were still alive at the end of the war. [26]

The Doctor. Wilhelm Stäglich questioned the authenticity of these two paragraphs in the Wannsee Minutes. Stäglich wrote: [27]

"With the exception of the opening sentence of the first paragraph, these two paragraphs do not fit the structure of the document, and this, in addition to the obscurity of the second paragraph, is unusual in the official record of such an important conference. At least that's what you can say. [...]

There can be no doubt about the inappropriateness of these two paragraphs with the rest of the document. Therefore, it is not at all surprising that they are quoted out of context. Only through such procedures can readers, who are critical by nature, be deceived about the actual content of the 'Wannsee Protocol'. The much-vaunted evidence ended up revealing great negligence on the part of the forgers. These simply were not careful to coordinate the adulterations made with the rest of the text."

Conclusion

Peter Longerich writes that the Wannsee minutes that survive are evidence that the purpose of the conference was to discuss precisely who would be targeted, as well as how to deport a total of 11 million people, subject them to to extremely severe forced labour, and finally to otherwise kill anyone who survived or was no longer able to work [28] . In reality, the genocide of European Jews was not discussed at the Wannsee Conference. Longerich's book Wannsee: The Road to the Final Solution adds no new information about the Wannsee Conference and fails to document a German program of genocide of European Jews.


Endnotes

[1] Longerich, Peter, Wannsee: The Road to the Final Solution, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2021, p. 2.

[2] Hilberg, Raul, The Destruction of European Jews, New York: Harper & Row, 1986.

[3] The Revised Hilberg, Simon Wiesenthal Annual, Vol. 3, 1986, p. 294.

[4] De Wan, George, "The Holocaust in Perspective," Newsday: Long Island, N.Y., Feb. 23, 1983, Part II, p. 3.

[5] See trial transcript, pp. 846-848. Also, Kulaszka, Barbara, (ed.), Did Six Million Really Die: Report of Evidence in the Canadian "False News" Trial of Ernst Zündel, Toronto: Samisdat Publishers Ltd., 1992, p. 24.

[6] Poliakov, Leon, Harvest of Hate, New York: Holocaust Library, 1979, p. 108.

[7] Kershaw, Ian, Hitler, the Germans, and the Final Solution, New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2008, p. 96.

[8] The Canadian Jewish News, Toronto, Jan. 30, 1992, p. 8. See also https://www.jta.org/archive/nazi-scheme-not-born-at-wannsee-israeli-holocaust-scholar-claims.

[9] Yahil, Leni, The Holocaust: The Fate of European Jewry, 1932-1945, Oxford University Press, 1990, p. 312.

[10] Longerich, Peter, Wannsee: The Road to the Final Solution, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2021, pp. 8-9, 35.

[11] Ibid., p. 2.

[12] Ibid., p. 39.

[13] Ibid., pp. 39-45.

[14] Ibid., pp. 48-51.

[15] Ibid., pp. 52-55, 103.

[16] Ibid., p. 85.

[17] Ibid., p. 59.

[18] Ibid., pp. 59, 61.

[19] Ibid., p. 62.

[20] Ibid., pp. 58-84.

[21] Kulaszka, Barbara, (ed.), Did Six Million Really Die: Report of Evidence in the Canadian "False News" Trial of Ernst Zündel, Toronto: Samisdat Publishers Ltd., 1992, p. 381.

[22] Stäglich, Wilhelm, Auschwitz: A Judge Looks at the Evidence, Institute for Historical Review, 1990, pp. 33-34.

[23] Longerich, Peter, Wannsee: The Road to the Final Solution, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2021, pp. 70, 72.

[24] Ibid., p. 69.

[25] Rudolf, Germar, Lectures on the Holocaust: Controversial Issues Cross-Examined, Uckfield, UK: Castle Hill Publishers, 2017, p. 128.

[26] Ibid., p. 129.

[27] Stäglich, Wilhelm, Auschwitz: A Judge Looks at the Evidence, Institute for Historical Review, 1990, pp. 36-37.

[28] Longerich, Peter, Wannsee: The Road to the Final Solution, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2021, p. 1.