 |
or in part, of the occupied territory. But if this broad definition
of plundering constitutes a war crime, then not only are individual defendants
guilty of this war crime, but also countless other industrialists and —
this is important — not only the industrialists as entrepreneurs, but
also, in accordance with Control Council Law number 10, as principals and
accessories, a vast number of employees, foremen, and workers who worked in the
occupied territories in such factories.
The situation as regards
count three, the alleged slave labor count, is exactly the same. If the
prosecution is right, and if the mere employment of foreign workers,
irrespective of good or bad treatment, is a war crime, then hundreds of
thousands of German industrialists, employees, master workmen, foremen, skilled
workers, and farmers are guilty of this war crime.
What caused the
prosecution to cast its nets so wide?
Even at the Crimea Conference on
11 February 1945, the aims of the Allies were formulated in such a way that
every German who retained his ability to reason, in spite of twelve years of
national socialism, could agree with the statement: |
| |
"It is our inflexible resolve to
destroy German militarism and national socialism and to make sure that Germany
will never again be able to destroy world
peace." |
| In the meantime, however, the scope of the aims was increased, and
little by little, Hitler, the high Nazi leaders, and the war-mad militarists
were no longer held solely responsible; the decent German military
personalities and industrialists were also included, and it does not matter
— these are General Taylor's own words — whether these industrialists
had anything to do with national socialism, or even whether they were
persecuted by the Nazis or regarded with distrust. If industrialists are
brought to trial irrespective of their National Socialist leanings, that is
pure anti-capitalism which, as we have seen, gives great joy to the Communists
and conforms with the oft-repeated attacks against industry by Hitler, who
hated the educated section of Germany, especially the industrialists, and also
repeatedly attacked the capitalists, stating, for example, on 10 December
1940: |
| |
"How can a capitalist possibly
come to terms with my principles? Rather will the devil go to church and use
holy water, before a capitalist will consider grappling with the ideas which we
now take for granted." |
| The fundamental points of law for this case are to be found in
international law. Up to now, it was a general legal principle for the state,
which is concerned with the rights and duties of |
224 |
. 
