33 Ru?, “Massaker,” 486; Berkhoff,
34 Darmstadt testimony, 29 April 1968, IfZ(M), Gd 01.54/78/1764-1765; Berkhoff, “Records,” 304.
35 Prusin, “SiPo/SD,” 7-9; Rubenstein,
36 Rubenstein,
37 On Kharkiv, see Pohl, “Schauplatz,” 148; and
38 Gerlach,
39 Megargee,
40 Quotation and figures are from Gerlach,
41 For the “sea of blood,” see Gerlach,
42 This was an argument of the previous chapter.
43 The Soviet rationale was a classic one. First, the NKVD “established” that Germany had hundreds of spies among the Volga Germans. Then, the NKVD argued that the entire population was guilty, since none of the Volga Germans had reported all of this espionage to the proper authorities. In a particularly refined move, the NKVD used the presence of swastikas in German households as evidence of Nazi collaboration. In fact, the Soviets had themselves distributed those swastikas, in 1939, when Moscow and Berlin were allies, and a friendly visit from Hitler was expected. By the end of 1942, the Soviets had resettled some nine hundred thousand Germans, the vast majority of the German population in the Soviet Union. The Soviets deported some eighty-nine thousand Finns, most of them to Siberia. On Stalin, see Polian,
44 Quotation: Lukacs,
45 Angrick,
46 Chelmno is discussed in Chapter 8. The connection is made by Kershaw,
47 Himmler and Globocnik will be discussed at greater length in Chapter 8.
48 Megargee,
49 Arguing from the periphery, from Belarus and Ukraine to Berlin, Gerlach and Pohl each make a case for the importance of food supplies in the extermination of the Jews. Aly and Heim, arguing forward from the logic of prewar planning, present a kind of negative explanation for the Holocaust: the Jews were already regarded as harmful in future designs and as useless consumers of present necessities. Hitler certainly undertook the war against the Soviet Union on the understanding that food supplies could thereby be secured during the war and for future wars. It is certainly true that the Hunger Plan, real supply difficulties for the Wehrmacht, and the perceived need to satisfy German civilians mattered a great deal on the eastern front generally. The concern for food made it easier for officers to endorse killing Jews. As the war continued, the economic argument about Jewish labor would be countered by the economic argument about the food Jews would eat. I agree that food played a much greater role in the process than it might appear from English-language literature on the Holocaust. But I do not believe that food (or any other economic consideration) can explain the timing or the precise content of Hitler’s policy as conveyed in December 1941. It was
50 Quotation: Edele, “States,” 374.
51 On the 3 January meeting of Hitler with the Japanese ambassador, see Hauner,
52 Krebs, “Japan,” 547-554.
53 German propaganda was making the case explicitly; see Herf,
54 Quoted and discussed, for example, in Longerich,
55 On Hitler (“common front”), see Herf,
56 Madajczyk, “Generalplan Ost,” 17; Mazower,
57 Compare Browning, “Nazi Decision”; and Gerlach, “Wannsee.” See also Kershaw,
58 See Kroener, “Frozen Blitzkrieg,” 140, 148.
59 See Gerlach,
60 On Serbia, see Manoschek,
61 That such camouflage was felt to be necessary is a telling sign, since it reveals the Nazis’ supposition that someone else might read their documents, which would happen only if they lost the war. Stalinists and Stalin himself had no such difficulties writing, signing, and filing direct orders to kill large numbers of people.
62 Birn, “Anti-Partisan Warfare,” 289.
63 For the count, see Brandon, “The First Wave.”
64 Deletant, “Transnistria,” 157-165; Pohl,
65 Deletant, “Transnistria,” 172; Pohl,
66 Pohl, “Schauplatz,” 153, 162. The gas chambers are the subject of Chapter 8.
67 Pohl counts thirty-seven thousand auxiliary policemen active in July 1942 in the Reichskommissariat Ukraine; see “Hilfskrafte,” 210.
68 These Volhynian communities are treated in greater detail in Spector,
69 Arad, in