740.00116 European War 1939/1434
The British Embassy to the
Department of State
Memorandum
His Majesty’s Embassy have the honour, with reference to the Department of
State’s memorandum of April 8th, (740.00116 European War/1301) to transmit
to the Department herewith a paraphrase of a message received from the
Foreign Office in regard to the distinction between war crimes to be dealt
with by commanders in the field and those to be dealt with by the United
Nations Commission for the investigation of war crimes.
Washington
, 20 May,
1944.
[Enclosure]
Paraphrase of Telegram Received from Foreign
Office, Dated May 12, 1944
We are not quite sure what the State Department have in mind in proposing
that military commanders should retain the power to try and punish, at
their discretion, all offenders subject to their jurisdiction.
- 2.
- On the one hand we agree that in general as many trivial offences
as possible should be dealt with on the spot. Experience in Italy
seems to have shown that the directive contained in telegram No. Fan
260 of 29th October, 1943, from the Combined Chiefs of Staff to
General Eisenhower, and the instructions based thereon in A.F.H.Q.
circular No. A.P.O. 512 of 27th November, 1943,47a have
proved unduly restrictive in practice; local military authorities
are precluded from
[Page 1317]
dealing, for example, with minor cases such as the theft by Italians
of parcels intended for Allied prisoners-of-war which took place
before the Allied occupation. The proposal contained in my telegram
No. 445 of 18th January48 may therefore need amending to give wider
powers to those on the spot. We feel that the aim should be to avoid
submission to the United Nations Commission for the Investigation of
War Crimes of a mass of trivial cases which would only clog the
machinery and prejudice the expeditious handling of important
cases.
- 3.
- On the other hand we feel that, so long as the United Nations
Commission is in existence, and importance is attached to a uniform
policy being followed in regard to the treatment of war criminals,
the powers of the Allied military commanders must be clearly
defined. The State Department’s present proposal might be
interpreted as empowering military commanders to try and punish
anyone falling into their hands. In the case of major war criminals
and in cases in which other Allied Governments have a direct
interest, this would not in our view be desirable.
- 4.
- We therefore suggest that local commanders should be empowered to
try and punish (a) offences committed against
their own command during the course of operations (as proposed in my
telegram No. 445), and (b) all minor offences
where the important consideration is that they should be rapidly
disposed of; but that all more important cases other than under (a), and particularly those raising questions
of principle or directly concerning other Allied Governments, should
be dealt with through the machinery of the United Nations
Commission. It is probable that the State Department have something
of this sort in mind. We feel, however, that some more precise
definition of their formula on the above lines is desirable.
- 5.
- As regards minor cases now arising in Italy, such as those
referred to at end of second sentence of paragraph 2 above, we think
trial by the Allied command preferable to trial by Italian
authorities, since the latter might constitute an undesirable
precedent for the treatment of other and more important war
criminals later on.
