Pilecki in NYC. The debate “Lessons from Nuremberg for the 21st Century” - Instytut Pileckiego

The debate “Lessons from Nuremberg for the 21st Century” focused on the legacy of the Nuremberg Trials and their real impact on the development of contemporary international law and the methods of prosecuting war criminals.

Participants:

Steve Crawshaw, a British journalist, writer, and former correspondent for The Independent;

Jack El-Hai, author of the bestselling reportage book “The Nazi and the Psychiatrist”;

Mark Kramer, Director of the Cold War Studies Program at the Davis Center at Harvard University;

Igor Lukeš, Professor of History and International Relations at Boston University;

Krystian Wiciarz, Acting Deputy Director for Research at the Pilecki Institute.

The debate was moderated by Dr. John Cornell, an Assistant Professor at the Pilecki Institute’s Center for Totalitarian Studies.

The discussion addressed the crucial issue of the significance and symbolism of these trials in the 21st century, in an era of the resurgence of authoritarian systems and growing tensions in international relations. Participants explored the extent to which the Nuremberg principle of “refusing silence in the face of atrocities” has stood the test of time, especially in the context of contemporary conflicts and wars.

According to Steve Crawshaw, “the trial of the major Nazi war criminals, as well as the subsequent trials at Nuremberg, constituted a cornerstone in the development of international criminal law, which continues to be an important point of reference and model for further war crimes prosecutions.”

An important issue was assessing the effectiveness of holding heads of state accountable and the role of psychology in this context. Experts analyzed whether the threat of punishment actually curbs the aggressive actions of dictators, especially as the International Criminal Court is in a deep crisis.

The debate focused on whether the mechanisms of justice function merely as
a theoretical barrier, especially since, after the spectacular speed of issuing arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu.

This decision sparked a strong opposition from the US government, leading to a crisis in international justice and casting doubt on the actual authority of law against those in power.

Historical “blank spots,” including Soviet crimes for which there was no Nuremberg, became a key topic of discussion, as broached by Mark Kramer and Igor Lukes. It was emphasized that the development of criminal law “would not have been possible without the contribution of Polish lawyers, diplomats, and the government-in-exile.”

Already in January 1942, the efforts of the Polish government-in-exile, culminating in the declaration of St. James’ Palace, which brought together the governments of the occupied nations, significantly contributed to the shaping of international norms.

The key contributions were those of individuals such as Witold Pilecki and Jan Karski, as well as eminent lawyers: Raphael Lemkin, Emil Stanisław Rappaport, Ludwik Ehrlich, Stefan Glaser, Jerzy Litawski, Tadeusz Cyprian, Jerzy Sawicki, Manfred Lachs, and Jan Sehn.

Dr. Wiciarz noted, however, that “after World War II, the window of opportunity for prosecuting crimes closed very quickly – the Iron Curtain and the Korean War happened, which prompted the US to give Konrad Adenauer the green light to change his policy regarding the accountability of officers and soldiers of the Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS.”

In the case of Soviet crimes, there was no “window of opportunity”. Despite the hopes of the 1990s, reality quickly verified these expectations.

Russia’s current political system represents a new version and a continuation of past criminal practices. It was this continuity that led to the largest armed conflict in Europe since the end of World War II – the Russian aggression against Ukraine.

At the same time, the participants in the debate recognized the issue of recording crimes as
a fundamental element. Documenting violations is essential not only for the purposes of international criminal law, but above all as a tribute to the victims and a tool for preserving the memory of their suffering.

At the conclusion of the debate, contemporary evidence-gathering methods were compared to those used by the Allied commissions. It was noted that even before the Nuremberg verdict, the Polish Supreme National Tribunal passed a sentence against Arthur Greiser. This was the first ruling to apply the category of genocide, predating the 1948 Convention.

Currently, the Lemkin Center continues this mission, among other things conducting research on the crimes of genocide. Thanks to the efforts of Monika Andruszewska and the Ukrainian activist Iryna Dovhan, it allows the world to see the face of the Russian occupation in Ukraine.

In the face of this new aggression, which is a continuation of old criminal practices, the debate participants agreed that “the question of political will and social emotion remains crucial for international and transitional justice, because without them, the effectiveness of criminal law is limited.”