By Stephen W. Houghton II
One of the chief interrogators of Nazi leaders after World War II, John E. Dolibois, spoke to an audience of about 100 lawyers and others at the Robert H. Jackson Center on Wednesday. Dolibois, former United States Ambassador to Luxemburg, told of his experiences in 1945 when he was one of five American interrogators who worked to collect evidence from former Nazi leaders, which was used at their trial before the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg.
He told the audience how, when he arrived at the prisoner of war camp in Mondorf, Luxemburg, he had not been told of the camp’s purpose and his new commander was not there to brief him. He said he was unpacking his things in the room he had been assigned when there was a knock at his door. Thinking it was his new commander, Dolibois said, “Come in.” Dolibois received the surprise of his life when he turned around and saw an overweight man in a pearl grey uniform with gold braid. “Goering, Reichsmarchall,” the man said with a click of his heels and a bob of his head. “My mouth fell open,” Dolibois said. “For the first time, I realized that my assignment at Mondorf had to do with high-ranking Nazis.”
Dolibois told the crowd about the methods interrogators used to gain information needed to try the leaders of the Third Reich. Interestingly, one of the subterfuges was suggested by a comment of Herman Goering’s at his first meeting with Dolibois. Goering asked Dolibois if he was the welfare officer for the prisoners. The quick-thinking Dolibois said yes and received much gossip and more valuable information over the ensuing months from this ruse.
Another tactic used to gather information was playing the various prisoners off against one another. Dolibois said the prisoners were often willing to provide “dirt” on each other. The prisoners formed into three groups that barely spoke to one another. The first group was composed of senior generals and admirals of the German armed forces. The second was composed of professional bureaucrats, some of whom had worked under the German government before and during the reign of the Nazis. The third group was composed of the Nazi Party leaders.
By playing the members of the three groups against one another, much information was gained, Dolibois said. The information was sent to the prosecution team, which was lead by Justice Robert H. Jackson.
During months of interrogation, Dolibois said he came to know the Nazi leaders well. Asked what had caused the Nazi atrocities, Dolibois unhesitatingly said, “Power. If you take someone who does not have much character and is a bully at heart and give them a uniform and legal protection, they take advantage of it. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
When he was asked who was the most interesting of the many high-ranking Nazis he met, Dolibois said it depended on what one meant by interesting. “The most exciting to talk to was Goering,” Dolibois said. “He was an air force ace during the first world war. (Goering succeeded the Red Baron in command of the Flying Circus.) He could be charming and witty when he wanted to be.”
Goering, Dolibois said, tested as the third most intelligent of the prisoners, despite the fact that he was consuming 40 codeine tablets a day. It was because of the combination of his fame as a flyer, his intelligence and his apparent charm that Goering acted as the Nazi’s “Front Man,” Dolibois said.
Psychologically, the most interesting of the prisoners was Julius Streicher, Dolibois said. Streicher was the publisher of the anti-Semitic newspaper Der Stuermer and one of Hitler’s most fanatic followers. Streicher proudly described himself to Dolibois as “a Jew baiter.” He tested as having the lowest intelligence of all the prisoners, Dolibois said. Even so, he said, Streicher had a fascinating knowledge of Jewish culture and literature. This, he said, was because of a huge library of works of Jewish thought and literature had been looted from across Europe and sent to Streicher, who twisted the knowledge he gained for use in his anti-Semitic propaganda. “The irony is that Streicher, who had given his life to wiping out Jewish culture, preserved that aspect of Jewish culture,” Dolibois said, meaning the library survived.
Dolibois also gave his evaluation of the sentences of some of the Nazis. He said a number of them had gotten off too lightly, while others were punished more than was appropriate. Albert Speer, the German minister of armaments and Hitler’s chief architect, got off too lightly, Dolibois said. “Speer was as guilty as they come,” he said. “He should have been hung. He was close to Hitler and could have influenced him, but didn’t. He admitted he knew what was going on.”
On the other hand, Alfred Jodl, the German Army’s Chief of Operations who was sentenced to death at Nuremberg, Dolibois said, should have been sentenced more lightly. “Jodl was at the wrong place at the wrong time,” Dolibois said.
Welhelm Keitel, Commander in Chief of the German Army, was a genuine war criminal, according to Dolibois. “Keitel was hanged for issuing orders to deploy the death squads on the eastern front and the orders to kill hostages and prisoners of war,” he said. “He deserved to be hanged.”
Grand Admiral Karl Doenitz, Commander in Chief of the German Navy, Dolibois said, ”would have been acquitted if not for the Russian’s determination to find him guilty.”
Contrary to the belief of many who say that Rudolf Hess was insane and unfit to stand trial at Nuremberg, Dolibois said, “Hess was interesting. He was perfectly sane. His amnesia was totally self-induced.”
Dolibois concluded his talk by saying that the important lesson to learn from Nuremberg is that freedom must always be preserved so that the horrors of the Nazis cannot be repeated.
Transcribed by Charlene J. Peterson, 2003