The Kastner trial and its historical significance

Kastner Trial

For millions of Jews, the Holocaust and its lingering effects would have a dramatic impact upon Israeli society. Where, it would serve as a catalyst for deep reflection and regret (especially among the survivors). In the late 1940's and early 1950's, many survivors would recognize individuals, who were thought to have collaborated with Nazi's. This would lead to the passage of: the Laws of Punishment of Nazis and their Collaborators. These are laws that would specifically target anyone who helped the Nazis achieve their objectives. At first they would not receive much attention, until Malchiel Gruevenwald, would accuse Rudolph Kastner of collaborating with the Nazis. (Veitch 153 -- 174) What happened was, when the Nazis invaded Hungary in 1944, they began to immediately make plans to take entire Jewish neighborhoods and have them sent to Auschwitz. Fearing the worst, the Rescue Committee in Hungary began to negotiate with a group of SS officers (led by Adolph Eichmann). Their objective was to slow if not prevent this action from occurring. Where, this strategy had worked in Slovakia two years earlier, effectively mitigating the death of hundreds of thousands of Jews. At which point, they would begin to have discussions with the Nazis, about possibly excluding segments of the Jewish population from being sent to the death camp. Kastner was a prominent individual in Hungarian society and would be the lead negotiator with Eichmann. The solution that the Nazis proposed was sending one train load of Jews to neutral country, while the rest of the population would go to Auschwitz. The total amount that he would save from the death camp was 1,684 people. On this train were many of Kastner's: family, friends and wealthy / prominent individuals in Hungarian society. This is problematic, because his actions would save a select number of people, while sentencing the rest of the Jewish community to death. After the war was over, Kastner would immigrate to Israel and would become an important member in the government as well as the Mapai (labor) party. (Frankel 211 -- 230) When you compare what occurred with the anti-collaboration laws; this meant that many individuals would claim that he (Kastener) was a Nazi sympathizer. Given the fact that the actions took place, before the laws were in implemented and Israel was a country, meant that he could not be prosecuted. Yet, the accusations would continue, until Kastner was forced to take legal action. To fully understand this view requires examining the issues surrounding the trial and its lasting impact upon Israeli politics. Together, these different elements will highlight how this trail would have a profound impact upon Israeli society.

The Issues Surrounding the Kastner Trial

At the heart of the issues surrounding the Kastner Trial are: the underlying levels of corroboration with the Nazis, accusations that he helped implement the systematic extermination of Hungarian Jews, he financially benefited from these actions and protected known war criminals. (Linn 40 -- 53) in this situation, Kastner would argue that he was not in violation of any kind of Nazi collaboration laws, as his actions would save a certain amount of people from the death camps. At the same time, he would highlight the fact that he was investigated when the laws were first implemented and no wrong doing was discovered. However, despite these realities Malchiel Gruevenwald would continue to insist that Kastner was a Nazi collaborator and that he violated Israeli law. At first Kastner would ignore the claims made by Gruevenwald, then when his political career he became in jeopardy, he would sue him for liable. As a result, the trail would highlight the issues of: collaboration with the Nazis and responsibility.

During the proceedings, Kastener would continually be placed on the defensive. As the Israeli government, was accused of negotiating and working with the people who murdered other Jews. Where, the trial would become an issue surrounding the social and political status in Israel. A good example of this can be seen with the comparisons of the actions of Ben Gurion's government to Kastner during the war. Where, he would play a major role in the government and would share similar philosophies to Ben Gurion. This is problematic, because it would mean that the Israelis would negotiate with many former Nazis and sympathizers after the war. This is significant, because these arguments would enrage many citizens, creating a mob like atmosphere during the trial. To counter these claims many in the Mapai party would argue that the people were reluctant to go on Kastner's train, for out of fear of possible Nazi abuses. This (they argue) is these individuals using their free will to determine what train they are going on. In many ways, one could claim that the actions taken by Kastner were similar to those taken by Noah on the Arch. As he was trying to save as many people as possible, but given the sheer brutality of the Nazis he could only save a token amount. This is a better outcome in comparison with doing nothing. The results of the trial were that Gruevenwald would be acquitted of nearly all the liable charges against him. Commenting about what took place, the presiding judges said, "This approach facilitated the attribution of absolute responsibility to Kastner for the consequences of his actions -- the death of 400 thousand Hungarian Jews." (Ring 80 -- 89) This is important, because it shows how the role of certain Jews during the Holocaust would have an impact upon: Israelis politics and society in the future. As the trial serve as a way of establishing the roles that certain Jews would play during the Holocaust. Where, the people who were more passive were often thought of as cowards and traitors; while those individuals who fought against the policies of the Nazis were viewed as heroes. (Ring 80 -- 89)

The Lasting Impact upon Israeli Society

The immediate effects of the trial are: the Israeli press would have a field day covering the events and aftermath. Where, they would highlight how Kastner and members of the Mapai Party were spineless cowards, who sold out their own people. Evidence of this can be seen with headlines from Herut (a leading daily newspaper) saying, "Eichmann's Partner Sold his Soul to the Devil." This was problematic for Kastner as the verdict was seen as vindication for Gruevenwald and the conservatives. For the Mapai Party, this issue was particularly challenging, as they did not want to say that they agree with the court's ruling. Yet, they were forced to confront accusations that they helped to increase the effectiveness of the Nazi killing machine. (Ring 80 -- 89) This would be troubling for the party, as they were stuck in between two different viewpoints and the past. As a result, Kastner would appeal his case to the Israeli Supreme Court. Where, they would overturn it and justify the actions that he taken during the war. However, two and half months before the verdict, Kastner was shot and killed in front of his home. This is important, because it shows how the trial would have an effect on Israeli society. As they would seek out those individuals, who they believed played a role in supporting the Holocaust and the actions of the Nazis. (Ring 80 -- 89)

This would have ripple effects on Israeli society and politics going forward. Where, the Mapai Party would remember the unfavorable ruling they received in 1955. Subsequently, they would block the judge that served on the trial from a participating in the proceedings against Adolph Eichmann (in 1961). This is important, because the government did not want to have a repeat of the 1955 trial. Instead, they wanted to focus on the actual merits of the case against Eichmann vs. who he may have negotiated with. The reason why, was because the Mapai party wanted to change the focus of the political discussion. As they would concentrate, on the actual acts of murder that was committed. The Eichmann trial was the opportunity that they could use, to illustrate the lasting effects of the Holocaust in the minds of the general public and the world. The results were that the proceedings would transform the discussion and how the world thought of these events. (Linn 40 -- 53) This is significant, because it shows how the Kastner Trial would have an impact upon politics. Where, politicians wanted to avoid the same mistakes made during the Kastner indecent, by placing the event into focus for what it was (versus different opinions about who did what).

During the Eichmann Trail, he (Eichmann) did not view Kasnter as a collaborator. Instead, he believed that he was trying to save as many people as possible, during an event that he did have control of. This is important, because it would highlight the heated state of Israeli politics in the future. As the actions taken during the Holocaust would have an impact upon future actions, the Israeli government would take in regards to the Arabs. As one side would see them as an extension of the Nazis, who wanted to destroy Israel at any cost. At the same time, opponents would argue that Israel should be talking and negotiating with their neighbors, to avoid similar kinds of conflicts. This is important, because these views would have an impact upon various military operations and foreign policy actions taken in the future. A good example of this can be seen with the events surrounding the Six Day War in 1967. What happened was, Ben Gurion had continually argued for Israel to use self restraint in international affairs. The problem was that the Arabs would use this as way to attack Israel. For many conservatives, this was a continuation of the same policies, as the inactions from the Mapai party would make the security situation worse. Where, many conservatives would argue that these actions were similar to the inability of many Jews to stand up to Nazi oppression. In 1967 when the conservatives were in power, they would conduct a preemptive strike against: Egypt, Syria and Jordan. This would result, in sizeable gains in territory, because they were proactive in dealing with the problem. (Schlindler 123- 146) This is significant, because it shows how the Kastner trial would change politics in the future. As many individuals would often draw parallels to what happened during the Holocaust with modern day events. This would reshape how the Israeli government would interact with its neighbors and the world community. Where, there would be this constant struggle between the policy of restraint and taking actions to prevent a repeat of the Holocaust.