Daniel Hizgilov

Professor Barnhart
HIST 143
27 November 2015
Final Exam
Part I: Answer to Indictment of Major Wilhelm Trapp
1st June, 1946
Your Honors,
I, Major Wilhelm Trapp, commander of Reserve Police Battalion 101 of the
Ordnungspolizei, stand before you accused of crimes against humanity in relation to the killings
and deportations of Jews in the Polish towns of Jozefow, Serokomla, Talcyn, Kock, Miedzyrzec,
Lukow, Lomazy, Konskowola, Parczew, and Radzyn. While the undeniable evidence for the
actions of my battalion can be found in the vacated homes and disturbed forests of Poland, and
such evidence cannot be refuted, I find I must defend my prior actions when faced with orders
from my superiors, in front of this Tribunal.
My actions from July of 1942 through 1943, which were carried out with great strain to
my conscience, were the result of a culture of rigid obedience and a preponderance of
propaganda designed to conform my mind and the minds of my men into acceptance of the
notion of revenge killings. In fact, as I was tasked with the great misfortune of relaying the
ghastly orders to my men, I recall telling them that because Germanys women and children were
under attack by the enemy, -- the Allies were dropping bombs on the homes of our innocent
wives and children and the Soviets were slaughtering our brave sons at Stalingrad as I spoke -- it
was justifiable for us to exact revenge on the Jewish women and children who had been

categorized as the enemy by my superiors. The orders to commence special actions in

Poland came from the highest offices of the S.S. and I did not have the jurisdiction to challenge
them, as my conscience wished to do. Orders are orders and it was not my place to disobey
that was what I had been told.
At Jozefow, as individuals within my battalion can attest too, I was greatly disturbed by
the action with which we had been tasked. I was gripped by a state of terror and a visceral
disgust for my disposition. I could not bear to watch my men carry out their gruesome task. As a
lifelong police officer, my duty was to protect the lives and livelihoods of innocent people, not to
strip humanity from the Earth. In such a state, I did my best to provide an alternative in offering
older men in my battalion the option to step out with my protection. To my dismay, only a dozen
men took up my offer.
In my defense, I would like to cite the case of Lieutenant Heinz Buchmann, who served
in 1st company. He was the greatest objector to the action with which we had been tasked and
requested to be exempt from any killing operations. I supported him in his conviction and made
sure to provide alternative means for him to carry out his duties. Unfortunately, at Lukow, when
I was elsewhere with the bulk of 1st company, Lieutenant Buchmann found in himself in a
position similar to mine at Jozefow. Under direct orders from superior officers of the S.S.
Security Police, he was tasked with carrying out a mass shooting of Jews and had no choice but
to proceed. Even the most principled man must obey when the gun of authority is pointed at him.
I am fully aware of the role which I played in this unfortunate operation, but I must
emphasize that my actions were the result of a culture of obedience and were a great strain on my
conscience. While this tribunal may dole out the punishment that it deems reasonable for my
participation in these actions, I only ask that there be mercy for the German people.

Part II: Albert Speers Response to Trapps Defense

Major Trapps defense comes across as articulate and sincere, but it does not excuse him
or any other individual, including myself, from the responsibilities of this regime. Blind
obedience to authority cannot be invoked as an excuse for the inability of a man to act in
accordance with his conscience. He must have the courage to say things that may put his life in
danger and be prepared to act decisively upon his words (Fest 200).
It is an inherent belief of mine, that one must stick to what he is good at to avoid inner
conflict. I was never one for politics. Instead, I was a man of technical expertise who had been
steered into a position from which political affairs became unavoidable. My passion was for
building and creating and this is what the Fuhrer seemed to find valuable in me. Similarly, Major
Trapps chosen line of duty asked of him to protect the lives and livelihoods of innocent
people. He was steered down a path, not by his own accord, in which politics came to overrule
his personal values and he experienced emotional conflict at Jozefow because of this.
In my role as Architect of the Reich, I was able to avoid the complexities and conflicts of
politics. My job was to build the Fuhrer's vision of a new Germany, not to become embroiled in
the intrigues and nuances of the Fuehrer's decision-making. It wasnt until the unfortunate death
of Fritz Todt and my subsequent promotion to Minister of Armaments, that I became entangled
in the web of contradictions that politics entailed.
As I mentioned in my defense, the Fuhrer gave me orders and I carried them out, I accept
responsibility for this; however I did not carry out all of his orders (Nuremberg 482). By 1944,
it had become clear that efforts to prolong the war were futile and I worked tirelessly, within my
capacity as Armaments Minister, against the Fuhrers idealistic notions of victory. It wasnt until
the spring of 1945, the final months of the war, that the Fuhrer issued the demolition order from

his bunker in Berlin. I jumped into action against this irrational command and raced to the front
to convince the Gauleiters and generals to ignore the order. I could not, in good conscience,
allow him to strip Germany of the industry that would be needed to rebuild after the war. While
Major Trapp did, in some capacity at Jozefow, work against the orders given to him by
permitting men such as Lieutenant Buchmann to step out, he did not adequately fight this order
which he claims was against his principles. Instead, at later deployments in Poland, he continued
to obey. Trapp could have resigned his post once he knew of the actions that were to come, but
he chose to follow and eventually became acclimated to his new role.
As agents of the government, we are all responsible for the actions of our regime. The
Fuhrer could not have put into action his plans for Germany had we not played our roles. It is for
this reason that we must take on this responsibility and express remorse to the world for our
participation in these crimes; crimes which I knew little of, but ultimately played an indirect role
in perpetrating. Major Trapp cannot hide behind the excuse of following orders. He had the
ability to challenge them and act in good conscience, but he showed weakness when faced with
inhumanity. It is this weakness, which infiltrated the German psyche since the Great War was
lost, that facilitated the Fuhrers rise.

Part III: Primo Levis Reflections on Trapp and Speer

Major Trapps experience as an officer of the Reserve Police, while the polar opposite of
the experience of his Jewish victims, captures the irony of Nazism; that an attempt to
dehumanize and destroy a group of people ultimately resulted in a dehumanization of the very
people who were carrying out the destruction.
I am often asked by those who have read my works, whether or not I harbor any hatred or
animosity towards the Germans for their participation in the idea of Nazism and the holocaust it

carried out. I do not hold feelings of hate and anger for the Germans because to hate the Germans
as a people would be to subscribe to the same ideology of ethnic-based hatred that fueled
Nazism. My disdain is directed towards those culprits who actively participated in creating the
genocidal environment of Eastern Europe; the organizers, the train drivers, and the executioners.
These are the people who deserve judgment and should not be forgiven for their crimes unless
their prior deeds indicate that they comprehend and regret the evil that they perpetrated. With
this in mind, and with Major Trapps integrity not in doubt, we can begin to analyze his
experience.
Much like the political prisoners and Jews, such as myself, in the lager, the Germans who
were subjugated by Nazism experienced a dehumanization. At Jozefow, Major Trapp described
how he interpreted the order to begin rounding up and executing Jewish villagers. He described
the order as a great strain on my conscience and recalled that he experienced emotional
distress because of his task. He was an ordinary man who pursued police work, not the work of
an executioner; the very role of which requires a man to lose compassion for life.
Albert Speer, the Nazi chief architect, who wrote a prior response to Trapps defense,
attempted to use his own experience of disobeying the irrational orders of Hitler to refute Trapp.
The Major was essentially given a choice between removing himself from the situation in protest
or following the atrocious order and he chose to follow it. It is true that he did offer his men the
option of not participating and protected one of his officers from involvement, but this is more a
compromise borne of guilt, rather than a sign of protest. I argue that all of this hairsplitting is a
trivial point. The very fact that both these men became vehicles of the Nazi genocide, no matter
how direct or indirect their actions were, makes them accomplices in the great crime against
humanity that was Nazism.

In the camps, our conditions and the dehumanizing behavior of our captors, turned us into
something less than human. We became animalistic; those of us who accepted defeat wallowed
in filth and disease while those of us who still wished to live stole and cheated to obtain food.
This dehumanizing factor created the environment in which Trapp carried out the order. Trapp
recalled how the Nazis had dehumanized the Jews with their propaganda, but also recalled that
orders are orders and it was not my place to disobey. Ordinary men had become conditioned
against the human urge to challenge authority and into blind obedience. Even the so-called
objector, Speer, went through a period where he obeyed without challenge.
Major Trapps case stands to show that Nazism, while perpetrating genocide, victimized
its followers as well by attempting to strip them of their own humanity. To create a simple divide
between perpetrators and victims removes any discussion of morality and any desire to
understand what could have caused common men to become murderers on an industrial scale.

Works Cited
Browning, Christopher R. Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in
Poland. New York: HarperCollins, 1992. Print.
Fest, Joachim C. The Face of the Third Reich: Portraits of the Nazi Leadership. New York:
Pantheon, 1970. Print.
Levi, Primo. Survival in Auschwitz: The Nazi Assault on Humanity. Trans. S. J. Woolf. New
York: Simon & Schuster, 1996. Print.
"Nuremberg Trial Proceedings Volume 16." The Avalon Project : Nuremberg Trial Proceedings
Volume 16. Yale Law School Lillian Goldman Law Library, 2008. Web. 02 Dec. 2015.