Shoah is a Hebrew term for catastrophe. It is used to characterize the genocide of Jews by the Nazis during World War II.

The term Shoah refers to genocide in the strict sense, that is to say a period running from the beginning of the massacres in the summer of 1941 to the end of the war in Europe in the spring of 1945 which marks the end of the danger for the Jews of Europe.

However, the persecution of Europe’s Jews begins long before, with daily humiliation and violence, legal and social exclusion, or even plunder, which began in the first weeks after the Nazis took power in Germany on 30 January 1933.

Today, historians have looked into the question and estimated the number of Jewish victims between 5 and 6 million. It is not possible to establish a detailed balance, the Nazis had not kept systematic accounts of the murders and gassings they committed. This is indeed the case in Poland and Russia, which before the war grouped together the largest Jewish communities in Europe where Jews died, either in ghettos or executed by Einsatzgruppen or even in death centers. However, for some countries, more precise calculations are possible. Thus, in France, the calculation is allowed thanks to the deportation lists left in the archives by the Nazis. Thus, nearly 76,000 Jews from France were deported to death centres, to which must be added the Jews who died for resistance on national soil or in concentration camps, shot as hostages, or who died in French internment camps. is close to 80,000. According to the American historian Raul Hilberg, 5,100,000 Jewish victims died during the Holocaust. He refined his calculation by detailing the breakdown of victims as follows:

• Deaths in ghettos: 800,000
• Deaths by execution (Einsatzgruppen): 1,300,000
• Death in extermination camps: 2,700,000
• Death in concentration camps: 300,000

The Holocaust Museum in Washington reports that more than 5,860,000 Jewish victims were killed. In any event, the figure of about 6 million people is advanced and accepted by most competent authorities on the issue. In fact, 50% of the Jews of Europe were murdered and 40% of world Judaism, then very much European.

According to “The Encyclopedia of the Holocaust” the number of Jewish victims per country is as follows:

Austria: 50,000, or 27% of the Jewish population in 1939.

Germany: 141 500, or 25%

Belgium: 28,900, or 44%

Bulgaria: 0

Bohemia/Moravia: 78 150, or 66.1%

Denmark: 60, or 0.7%

Estonia: 2000, 44.4%

Finland: 7, or 0.3%

France: 77,320, or 22.1%

Greece: 67,000, or 86.6%

Hungary: 569,000, or 69%

Italy: 7680 or 17.3%

Latvia: 71,500, or 78.1%

Lithuania: 143,000, or 85.1%

Luxembourg: 1950, 55.7%

Norway: 762, or 44.8%

Netherlands: 100,000, or 71.4%

Poland: 3,000,000, or 90.9%

Romania: 287,000, or 47.1%

Slovakia: 71,000, or 79.8%

USSR: 1 100 000, or 36.4%

Yugoslavia: 63,300, 81.2%

Extermination camps. Death camps. Killing centres A large number of books on the subject, but also textbooks for primary and secondary school students use the term “extermination camps” to talk about the places where Europe’s Jews were gas-murdered. There were six camps, all of which were located in the territory of Poland from 1939 to later become the territory of the German Reich:

• Auschwitz-Birkenau
• Belzec
• Chelmno
• Majdanek
• Sobibor
• Treblinka

The purpose of these camps was to destroy the Jewish populations of Europe. Historian Raul Hilberg prefers the expression “killing centres” which, he says, further reflects the reality of what these places were. Indeed, apart from Auschwitz-Birkenau and Majdanek which were mixed camps, that is to say, which also locked prisoners in order to exploit their labor, the other 4 (Belzec, Chelmno, Sobibor and Treblinka) were only places in which gas chambers or gas trucks were installed; they did not receive prisoners except a few dozen who were responsible for carrying out the work on the dead (collecting and sorting clothes, cleaning of the gas chambers, cremation, etc.). Thus, we cannot really speak of camps because the deportees did not stay there, they were immediately gassed upon their arrival.

Concentration camps

Concentration camps were established as soon as the Nazis came to power in Germany in 1933. Dachau, near Munich, was the first to open in March 1933. They were originally intended for «rehabilitation» through the work of opponents of the regime and people considered as asocial. With the war, these camps multiplied on German territory to receive the resistance and opponents deported from all over Europe. The principle of death by forced labour in the service of Germany becomes the rule.

Internment camps in France

The first internment camps in France were opened to accommodate Spanish republican refugees in 1938. They quickly welcomed the Germans and Austrians, mostly refugees in France because anti-Nazi or Jews, but considered by the French authorities as nationals of an enemy country. Many of these were then handed over to the Nazi authorities following the French defeat by the Vichy government in May-June 1940. From the spring of 1941, these internment camps welcomed the first Jewish men gathered in Paris. From then until the Liberation, more than 75,000 men, women and children were interned in these camps, having been interned following major raids such as those at the Vélodrome d'Hiver (16-17 July 1942) and Marseille (21 January 1943) or individual arrests, before being deported in cattle cars to killing centres in Poland. The vast majority of convoys leaving from France (77 convoys) left Drancy in the Paris region (67 convoys), which thus became the antechamber of death. Pithiviers, Beaune-la-Rolande or Compiègne were the main French internment camps in which the internees waited for their deportations without working.

The term “Final Solution to the Jewish Problem” (German: «Endlösung den Judenfrage») refers to the Nazi plan for the destruction of the Jews. The term is deliberately allusive, that is to say it was, for the Nazis, to hide the reality of their plan and the actions of «Einsatzgruppen» and organizers of deportations by using a chosen and vague vocabulary. He was employed at the Wannsee conference by Nazi dignitaries. This "final solution", the priority objective of the Nazis, concerned the eleven million Jews in Europe; this plan envisaged their arrest, their transfer to the East where those who would not be eliminated “naturally”, that is to say by forced labour and deprivation, would be “treated accordingly”, that is to say gassed in gas trucks or gas chambers.

Historians' interpretations of what makes Hitler and the Nazis fall into the hidden desire behind a chosen vocabulary to exterminate the Jews of Europe diverge. Thus, the debate between intentionalists and functionalists that agitated historians in the 1970s-1980s seems now outdated. The former considered that the will to exterminate the Jews of Europe was clearly stated in an ancient design, wanted and programmed by Hitler since his coming to power in 1933. For the latter, it is above all the outbreak of war in the USSR which changes the very nature of the war into a war of total annihilation, leading to a spiral of radicalization and the decision on the “final solution of the Jewish problem”.

However, today, if the intentionalist thesis is no longer relevant, some historians see in the roots of exclusive German nationalism the favorable soil on which a biological and uprooting anti-Semitism thrives from the end of the nineteenth century. It is this soil, in the light of the circumstances surrounding the war in the East, that allows for decision-making leading to the “Final Solution”.

The “final solution” seems to have been decided in the summer of 1941, at the time of the first major massacres in the East. According to recent studies, the decision was made following the outbreak of the invasion of the USSR by German troops. If the Jews of Europe had suffered until June 1941 persecution, expulsion and random killing, from the outbreak of war in the East they are systematically massacred; massacres that mark the beginning of the "Final Solution".

Christopher. Browning argues that Hitler decided to exterminate in the summer of 1941 while he was carried by the rapid successes of his offensive in the East. Philippe Burrin, on the contrary, insists that Hitler would have understood during the summer of 1941 that his project of a blitz victory in the East was doomed to failure. Before the prospect of a long war which he then analyzes as a war of the Reich against a world coalition (USA, USSR, Great Britain) inspired by «international Jewry», which must pay as soon as possible for the blood shed and which will be shed by German soldiers, Hitler would then have decided to exterminate the Jews of Europe.

The «final solution» was first made by special groups responsible for monitoring the advance of German troops in the East: the Einsatzgruppen. Then, in parallel, from December 1941 gas trucks were operating at the Chelmno killing centre in Poland. By 1942, the six killing centres were operating at full capacity.

The Jews were the only group to be systematically exterminated by the Nazis. Every member considered to belong to this group was threatened with death wherever the Nazi domination extended, whatever was its condition (man, woman, child, old sick, disabled, etc...). The Gypsies were also victims of massive destruction, but it was not systematic in the territories occupied by the Nazis.

The other groups classified as enemies of the Reich by the Nazis did not see their families threatened because they belonged to a particular, defined group. Thus, their families were not likely to be sent to concentration camps or extermination. Moreover, among these, the majority had chosen to be enemies of the Nazis through their military or political action. The Jews were guilty by essence, others were considered guilty because of their commitment or behavior.

The persecution of the Jews was a public affair in Germany from the time the Nazis came to power in 1933. Thus, the boycott of Jewish shops launched on 1 April 1933 was known to all German society. The 1935 Nuremberg racial laws excluding Jews from German society were published and put into practice in the open. The Kristallnacht pogrom on the night of 9 to 10 November 1938 saw the arrest of 30,000 people, the death of dozens, and the destruction of hundreds of places of worship and synagogues.

The mandatory wearing of the yellow star was decided in September 1941, the gathering of Germans of confession or Jewish origin in buildings were seen and known by everyone.

The Nazis tried to hide the «Final Solution» behind a deliberately elliptical vocabulary. We can think that for many Germans, the Jews who had disappeared from German society were sent east to be resettled or to work, but nothing was really clear about their fate.

However, how could we not think that a significant part of German society could have information about what was happening? Professor Victor Klemperer, still locked in his apartment, cut off from all information and contact with German society, mentions Auschwitz in his diary on 16 March 1942, adding that there are atrocious things going on. The number of employees of the Reichsbahn (German railway company) who drove or saw passing the trains of death, the employees of the many administrative departments that dealt with these issues, not to mention the actors themselves-also: The Ordnung Polizei police officers responsible for the massacre of the Jewish population in Poland and Russia, members of the Einsatzgruppen. So many were aware of what was going on and certainly many talked about it around them. It is very interesting to see the reaction of the men of the church, and in particular of Bishop Von Galen, bishop of Münster, who managed to stop the T 4 program for the elimination of disabled and social groups as soon as they issued an official protest.

The attitudes of the populations occupied by Nazi Germany to the persecution and deportation of Jews varied, and it is very difficult to draw up a comprehensive account of the different attitudes. Indeed, in every country there were zealous collaborators of the Nazis in the hunt for Jews, collaboration that went from denunciation to active action within police or militant organizations but there were also many people who helped the Jews.

However, if the situation of the Jews changed from country to country, in all the countries it occupied, Nazi Germany could find effective collaboration with its policy of discrimination, persecution and deportation. This was particularly true in Eastern Europe where an ancient tradition of anti-Semitism fostered collaboration in the effort to annihilate European Judaism. Indeed, the Jews of Eastern Europe had to suffer much more from the active collaboration of a part of the population. The poignant testimonies on the situation of Jews in Poland, and especially the extraordinary testimony of Calel Perechodnik , show how satisfied a part of the Polish population was with the fate of the Jews. Moreover, the Jewish populations were exterminated there, in the sight and the eyes of all the population who knew the fate reserved for the Jews. The Nazis were even supplemented by auxiliaries, especially Baltic and local anti-Semitic movements participated in anti-Jewish actions such as the Iron Guard in Romania, the Arrow Crosses in Hungary. Elsewhere in Europe, especially in western Europe, the population had less information about the details of the “Final Solution”.

However, it must be stressed that in all the countries of occupied Europe, individuals saved thousands of people at great risk by hiding them, protecting them or allowing them to flee. Aid and resistance groups also helped the Jewish population to escape massacres like Zegota in Poland, the resistance at Assisi in Italy or Joop Westerweel’s group in the Netherlands.

The Nazi regime’s outspoken anti-Semitism was very early known and understood in the U.S. and Europe, and was widely reported in the press.

Once the war was declared and the «Final Solution» started, the Nazis let less information circulate. However, less than a year after the systematic destruction of European Judaism began, information began to leak. Thus, the first report which clearly spoke of a methodical plan for mass murder of Jews was smuggled out of Poland by militants of the Bund (Socialist Party of Jewish Workers) and transported to England in the spring of 1942.

In the summer of 1942, the cablogram by Gerhart Riegner representing the World Jewish Congress in Geneva, sent to the British and American governments confirmed the previous report. In addition, the missives of Richard Lichtheim (1885-1963), delegate of the Jewish Agency in Switzerland to the Vatican and the various allied governments informed them of the dramatic evolution of the situation. It was not until the end of 1942 that the multiplication of confirmations put an end to the last doubts. The US government then confirmed to the Jewish authorities in America the content of the various reports that arrived from Eastern Europe through the governments in exile for example.

Thus, Jan Karski, emissary of the Polish resistance, who had penetrated into the ghetto of Warsaw, met with the highest authorities in order to warn of what was happening. The British aviation even took pictures of the Birkenau extermination camp, on which the smoke columns from the crematoria were clearly visible. The Allied powers adopted a joint declaration on 17 December 1942 denouncing the massacre of the Jews. The House of Commons observed a minute’s silence in honour of the victims. In fact, most of the elements of the extermination of the Jews were known to the Allies as early as 1942.

The Allies' response to the persecution and destruction of the Jews in Europe was never commensurate with the seriousness of the events.

Before the outbreak of war, tens of thousands of Jews sought to flee Nazi Germany. Between 1933 and 1937, 150,000 German Jews left Germany, of which 20,000 to 30,000 went to France, which quickly refused to accept them, and 27,000 to the United States, which was then hiding behind the policy of national quotas. Britain, faithful to the 1939 White Paper, did not intend to open Palestine to Jewish immigration that would attract Arab hostility.

The Evian Conference, called for by US President Roosevelt in 1938, was aimed at finding countries to welcome refugees fleeing Nazism.  The countries invited to Evian by the US and Great Britain were on the idea that none of them would have to change their immigration laws. It was a failure and despite the creation of the CIR (Intergovernmental Committee for Refugees), Jews wishing to leave Germany and Europe were abandoned.

During the conflict itself, a single statement of condemnation of the atrocities committed by the Nazis against the Jews was made by the Allies on 17 December 1942.

The Bermuda Conference (April 1943), convened by the US and Great Britain, was intended to harmonize allied policies and discuss the refugee issue. But while delegations expressed their compassion, they did not take any concrete decisions and did not relax their immigration policies. This conference did not lead to any agreement as to the possible rescue of the Jews of Europe and thus only confirmed the abandonment in which they were left. Faced with this indifference, the Bundist leader, a member of the Polish Council in exile, Samuel Zygelbojm committed suicide in London on 12 May 1943 hoping to alert the free world. Thus, the US and Great Britain were never ready to assume the possible migratory consequences of a rescue plan.

In January 1944, the War Refugee Board (WFD) was created to help victims of Nazi persecution. Its activities, largely funded by private funds from American Jewish donors, consisted of sending parcels and working to rescue people if possible.

Concrete measures could have been taken such as bombing of known killing centres of the Allies. Thus, they refused to bomb the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp or even the railway tracks that led there. They knew of the existence and location of the camp, notably through aerial photographs taken by Royal Air Force aircraft. Factories close to the various camps of the Auschwitz complex were themselves bombed. Nothing was ever attempted for a specific rescue of the Jewish population, nothing was done against the killing centres and the liberation of the camps was never a military objective.

In fact, the Allies did not intend to devote any special diplomatic efforts to the Jewish question or to allocate their military resources, both human and logistical.

The Nazis tried to keep secret the plans of the «Final Solution» and avoided talking about it openly.

Everything was done to deceive the victims and thus prevent and reduce the risks of resistance. At each deportation convoy there was a question of «population displacement», of «transfer to the East», that the situation in the East would be better than their living conditions in the ghettos of Poland or even that they were going to work. Upon arrival in the camps some detainees were even forced to write to their families or friends describing the good living conditions they now lived in.

On the other hand, the fact that men could design and build infrastructures for mass murder on a scale never before reached was unthinkable and inconceivable. Thus, the few people who could escape from convoys or even camps were not listened to or so little. In addition, the Jewish communities of Europe were very isolated from each other and information circulated very poorly.

It is particularly difficult to give exact figures and we can only speak of estimates for the number of Jews who were able to flee Europe before the outbreak of hostilities.

Thus, from 1933 to 1939, it is estimated that more than 350,000 German and Austrian Jews left their countries, some of whom moved to countries which were later occupied by the Nazis (the family of Anne Frank for example). Nearly 20,000 of these were able to reach Shanghai, which did not require an entry visa. During this same period, a little over 80,000 Polish Jews immigrated to Palestine and more than 50,000 European Jews moved to South America (Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay). In 1938-1939, 35,000 Jews from Bohemia and Moravia emigrated after the establishment of the protectorate by the Nazis.

However, accurate migration records are not possible because many countries cannot provide precise statistics on the community or religious affiliation of migrants they received during this period.

In 1940, 11 million European Jews were under threat from the Nazis.

Only the Jews were concerned with the “Final Solution”, as is also evidenced by the German expression used by the Nazis: “Die Endlösung den Judenfrage”, that is to say “the Final Solution of the Jewish question”.

For the Nazis, according to the definitions issued on November 14, 1935 following the racial laws of Nuremberg of September 15, 1935 «for the protection of German blood and honour», was considered as Jewish any person having at least 3 greatJewish parents; having 2 grandparents if he belonged to the Jewish religion or was married to a (e) Jew (ve) or was born from a marriage or an extramarital relationship between a Jew and a non-Jew after September 15, 1935.

In France, the Vichy government defines membership of the «Jewish race» in two statutes.

The 1st was enacted on October 3, 1940 and stated in its article 1 that “any person born of three Jewish grandparents or two grandparents of the same race is considered to be a Jew if his spouse is himself a Jew”.

The second statute of 2 June 1941 changes the definition by broadening it. Thus, article 1 states that he is considered a Jew “The person, whether or not of any denomination, who is descended from at least three grandparents of Jewish race, or only two if his spouse is himself descended from two grandparents of Jewish race. Is considered to be of Jewish race the grandparent who belonged to the Jewish religion.

Article 2 aggravates the previous provision by adding that “shall be considered as Jewish: any person who belongs to or belonged to the Jewish religion on 25 June 1940, and who is descended from two grandparents of Jewish race. The non-membership of the Jewish religion is established by proof of membership in one of the other denominations recognized by the State before the law of 9 December 1905. The disavowal or cancellation of a child’s recognition as a Jew is ineffective under the foregoing provisions.

Despite the terrible conditions of survival that the Jews had to face in occupied Europe, many of them engaged in armed struggle against the Nazis. There were different types of engagements and struggles, depending on the personalities of each of these fighters but also on the situation they were led to live.

The Jews who were party activists engaged in the struggle that their parties led. This was the case in France, for example, of communist militants of FTP-MOI (French Snipers and Partisans – Immigrant Labour) who fell heavily under German bullets. Thus, the young Rayman, Wasjbrot, Elek, Fingerweig or others of the Red Poster were active resistance fighters in Paris from 1942. In fact, the Jews who were members of political parties acted according to the political line set by the clandestine leadership of these parties.

Jewish partisan groups were active in many parts of occupied Europe, especially in the east. Baranovichi, Minsk, the Naliboki forest and Vilnius were also affected. In France, between the autumn of 1943 and the spring of 1944, Robert Gamzon organized the EIF (Éclaireurs Israélites de France) which had an intense activity in clandestinity. These organized a combat group in the Tarn which took the name of Marc Haguenau, named after the secretary general of the EIF murdered by the Gestapo in 1944. A maquis of the Jewish army, integrated into the free corps of the Black Mountain was baptized «Peloton Trumpeldor». These two maquis fought together for the liberation of the South-West of France. Thus, although these groups of Jewish resistance in occupied Europe did not have a military role always very significant, these acts of resistance contributed to the rescue of a large number of Jews, causing losses, admittedly limited but real, to the Germans who sometimes suffered in their self-esteem. Indeed, how was it possible for the latter that Jews, this people whom they considered a slave people, could fight, cause losses and die at arms?

The Nazis were surprised by the uprising in the Warsaw ghetto which began on 19 April 1943 and lasted for five weeks. This is the best example of Jewish armed resistance. This revolt was not an isolated act because many ghettos revolted.

Finally, the resistance of the Jews was also organized in the very places intended for their destruction. Indeed, revolts broke out in the killing centers of Treblinka (2 August 1943), Sobibor (14 October 1943) and Birkenau (7 October 1944). Each time, the extermination stopped shortly afterwards in each of these centers. Riots also broke out in the Janowska camp (19 November 1943) near Lvov and in Babi Yar (29 September 1943).

Established on 21 September 1939 by decision of the head of the Reich Security Office (RSHA) Reinhard Heydrich, the «Judenräte» were the Jewish councils designated by the Nazis in each ghetto or Jewish community of occupied Poland. Led by the local Jewish community, these councils were not only responsible for the administration of the ghettos but also for enforcing Nazi decrees concerning the Jews. As a result, the Judenräte were placed in a very difficult situation from the point of view of the populations they were responsible for. Indeed, under the pressure of the Nazis constantly threatening to deport or kill ghetto residents or the very families of members of the Judenräte, they were forced to comply with the demands of German officials in order to try to save what they thought they could save.

Some had controversial conduct, like Mordechai Rumkowski in Lodz or Jacob Gens in Vilno. This ambiguity of the role of the Judenräte caused after-war exchanges remained famous between the philosophers Hannah Arendt and Gershom Sholem. Indeed, in the book that the philosopher wrote on the Eichmann trial, she accused the Judenräte of having been collaborators of the Nazis in the destruction of the Jews of Europe.

Indeed, it may seem legitimate to think today, without denying the obvious excesses and abuses of power that existed, that many leaders of Judenräte tried, in the heart of the disaster, to work their best in order to preserve as many lives as possible. Their powerlessness in the face of the Nazi machine of destruction is now obvious to us, but was also felt by many members of the Judenräte. In his testimony, Hillel Seidmann makes us feel the weight of the steamroller against which nothing seems possible. In fact, the president of the Warsaw Judenrat, Adam Czerniakow, was forced to hand over to the Nazis on 22 July 1942 6,000 Jews to be deported every day. If not, they threatened to immediately kill 100 hostages, including Czerniakow’s own wife. The latter, after failing to save children from orphanages, chooses suicide. In the note he left to his wife, he explained that he could not “bear it any longer”, adding that his “act will show everyone that this is the only way forward.” On the same day, mass deportations of Jews from Warsaw to the Treblinka killing centre began.

During the entire duration of the Second World War, the Red Cross did little to help the Jews who were victims of Nazi persecution. Between September 1939 and the summer of 1944, the actions of the Red Cross were thus limited.

Between September 1939 and June 1941, food parcels were sent to people in need through the German Red Cross. The populations locked up in the Polish ghettos were not entitled to these parcels, being considered by the Nazis, to whom the German Red Cross obeyed, as a threat to the security of the Reich.

When the “Final Solution” was triggered, the Red Cross did not intervene any more. She tried to continue sending parcels but did not issue any official protest against the imprisonment and destruction of the Jews of Europe. It was nevertheless called upon, as a non-governmental charitable organization, by the Jewish organizations, especially American. The Red Cross was told that it could not intervene or protest at their request because this would cause a deterioration in the living conditions of the Jewish population of Europe.

It was only in the summer of 1944 that the Red Cross launched an appeal to Marshal Horthy, regent of Hungary, so that he would stop the deportation of the Hungarian Jews, which had already been well advanced. She followed in this the protests already issued by the US president F.D.Roosevelt and by the king of Sweden Gustav V, who had written personally to Horthy. Not long before, the Red Cross had been given permission to visit the Theresienstadt (Terezin) camp in Bohemia. It was after the arrival of Jews from Denmark in this camp on 5 October 1943 that the Red Cross of that country and the Swedish branch became concerned about the fate of these deported people. The Nazis decided to grant their request for a visit without offering them to see the reality. Indeed, under the direction of the camp commander, SS Colonel Karl Rahm, an embellishment was decided and more than 7,500 Jews were deported to hide the overpopulation, including hundreds of orphans and sick that the Red Cross should not see.

Thus, on the day of the visit, nine months after the first request, 23 June 1944, the Nazis were ready and the Red Cross delegates could appreciate the work of the bakers, the stalls of fresh vegetables or the cheerful workers. The delegation was even offered a show. The delegation made a report that provoked protests from Jewish organizations. In the weeks that followed, the prisoners of Theresienstatdt were deported with their families and murdered at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

There was not, after the war, a Nuremberg trial but two sets of trials that judged the Nazi criminals. The Nuremberg Tribunal was established on 8 August 1945 by the London Quadripartite Agreement (UK, USSR, USA and France).

The first series of trials opened on 20 November 1945 and lasted until 1 October 1946. He stood before the International Military Tribunal composed of French, British, Soviet and American representatives. The 22 leaders of the Nazi party, the army and the state who had been captured by the Allies were then tried. These men were to answer four charges: «concerted plan and conspiracy»; «crimes against peace», that is to say having decided, prepared, organized the war; «war crimes» that is to have violated the rules of war, for example, having executed prisoners of war, not respecting the Geneva Conventions; «crimes against humanity», that is to say, having organized the deportation and systematic massacre of unarmed populations, in particular in the concentration and extermination camps. Twelve of the accused were sentenced to death on 1 October 1946, including Martin Bormann in absentia and Hermann Goering who committed suicide in his cell on 15 October. The other ten were hanged on 16 October. These were Hans Frank, Wilhelm Frick, Alfred Jodl, Ernst Kaltenbrunner, Wilhelm Keitel, Alfred Rosenberg, Fritz Sauckel, Arthur Seyss-Inquart, Julius Streicher, Joachim von Ribbentrop.

The other convictions were as follows:

Karl Doenitz: 10 years
Hans Fritzsche: acquitted
Walter Funk: life in prison
Rudolf Hess: life imprisonment, committed suicide in 1987 at age 92.
Erich Raeder: life in prison
Hjalmar Schacht: acquitted
Albert Speer: 20 years
Konstantin Von Neurath: 15 years old
Franz von Papen: acquitted
Baldur von Schirach: 20 years

Four organisations were also declared criminal: the NSDAP (Nazi Party), the SS, the SD (Reich Security Service) and the Gestapo.

The second set of trials, 11 in total, was conducted between 9 December 1946 and 13 April 1949 before the Nuremberg Military Tribunal established by the United States Government Office for Germany. The judges were American but the court considered itself international. Approximately 185 persons were charged, including doctors who carried out medical experiments in the concentration camps on prisoners and prisoners of war; judges who committed murders and other crimes under the guise of a judicial procedure; industrialists who took part in the pillaging of occupied countries and the forced labor program; senior SS officers who directed concentration camps, Enforced the racial laws of the Nazis and implemented the extermination of Jews and other groups in the territories of Eastern Europe; finally, senior civil and military officials who took part in the politics of the Third Reich. A number of SS doctors and leaders were sentenced to death by hanging. One hundred and twenty people were sentenced to prison and thirty-five accused were acquitted.

We do not know the exact number of Nazi criminals or the number of soldiers, police officers or auxiliaries who participated in the murder and execution of hundreds of thousands of people. Indeed, in order not to leave traces, the Nazis themselves destroyed a large number of documents and many of those responsible or executors were never identified.

Among these criminals we can obviously include those who participated directly in the massacres. The SS of the Einsatzgruppen, the police of the Ordnungpolizei (Police for the maintenance of order), the guards of the SS death centers, the armed forces who witnessed or even participated in the massacres in Poland and the USSR. To these, it is necessary to add the individuals who planned, directed or supervised these operations of killing: the leaders of the Nazi Party, the Nazi state or the Reich Security which initiated the «Final Solution» and the massacres. In fact, there were thousands of actors of the «Final Solution» not to mention the zealous collaborators of the Nazis who lent them a strong hand.

After the judgment of the Nuremberg Military Court which condemned the main Nazi leaders who had been captured (20 November 1945-1 October 1946), the Allies continued to try Nazi criminals in the courts of each occupation zone. Between 1945 and 1949, for example, 5,025 Nazi criminals were convicted by the American, English and French courts in Germany. To these condemned, we must add those who were tried by the Soviets and whose number is unknown.

In addition, judgments were rendered, according to the lists compiled by the United Nations Commission on War Crimes, by the courts of the allied countries but also by those of the countries that were administered by the Nazis during the war. In total, almost 80,000 Germans were convicted of crimes against humanity and several tens of thousands of local collaborators.

Thus, Poland tried some 40,000 people, including in 1947 the commander of the Auschwitz camp, Rudolf Hoess, who was sentenced to death and executed at Auschwitz itself. Germany started the trials in 1945, and by 1969 nearly 80,000 Germans had been investigated and over 6,000 convicted. Thus, the SS guards of the Auschwitz camp were tried in Frankfurt in 1963.

In 1958, the Federal Republic of Germany established a special agency in Ludwigsburg to investigate crimes committed by Germans outside Germany. This agency was the origin of hundreds of important investigations (1200 between 1958 and 1985). However, the judgments handed down by the German courts were sometimes subject to controversy because of the leniency of certain verdicts in respect of the crimes committed.

The State of Israel organized, for its part, the kidnapping and trial of one of the main leaders of the «Final Solution», Adolf Eichmann, hidden in Argentina under a false identity. He was tried in 1961 in Jerusalem, sentenced to death and executed.

Finally, individuals and non-governmental organizations worked to discover and capture many Nazi criminals who had escaped justice. Thus, the couple Serge and Beate Klarsfeld were at the origin of the arrest of former Nazi criminals such as Kurt Lischka, Herbert Hagen, Ernst Heinrichsohn in the early 1970s or Klaus Barbie in 1987, among others. Similarly, the Simon Wiesenthal Centre helped to capture about a thousand Nazi criminals through its activities.

However, thousands of Nazi criminals escaped justice either by being killed before they were tried or by disappearing without a trace, whether or not under false identities in South America, Germany and even the US. Thus, SS Alois Brunner, commander of the Drancy camp and responsible for the deportation of Jews from France, was tried in absentia in France in 2001 and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Simon Wiesenthal centre had located him in Syria.

The Righteous among the nations are the non-Jews who helped the Jews during the Holocaust. These people chose to save the Jews, sometimes risking their own lives and those of their families. While the majority of Europeans remained silent without intervention and some collaborated with the Nazis, a few people chose to reach out to Jews in distress. There were "righteous among the nations" in every country where the Jews were threatened.

The State of Israel (created in 1948) and Yad Vashem, the national memorial to the Shoah in Israel, established a special distinction for those who had helped Jews threatened by Nazism under a 1963 law. They are also honoured. Each case presented at Yad Vashem by survivors who were saved by non-Jews is carefully studied before the distinction of “Just among the Nations” is granted. This title is only awarded on the basis of testimony of rescued persons or eyewitnesses and reliable documents.

Today, the Yad Vashem Institute has awarded the Medal of the Righteous to more than 20,000 people (20,757 as at 1 January 2005). Those recognized as such receive the Medal of the Just and an honorary certificate (given to the closest relative in case of posthumous recognition). Their names are inscribed on the Wall of Honour in the Garden of the Righteous at Yad Vashem. It is the highest distinction awarded to non-Jews by the State of Israel in the name of the Jewish people. Two European communes were made just among the nations: Chambon-sur-Lignon in Haute-Loire and Niewlande (Netherlands).

Poland has the highest number of Justes, with the Netherlands having the highest proportion of Justes.

This total of 20,757 people includes those who saved Jews. It is surely far from reality because many have never been known or were never revealed due to the disappearance of those who had been helped.

According to the Israeli government, the criteria for recognition of a Juste are as follows:

• To have helped in situations where the Jews were powerless and threatened with death or deportation to concentration camps.
• The rescuer was aware that by providing this assistance he was risking his life, safety and personal freedom (the Nazis considered assisting Jews a major crime).
• The rescuer did not demand any reward or material compensation for the assistance provided.
• The rescue or assistance is confirmed by the rescued persons or attested by direct witnesses and, where possible, authentic archival documents.

The assistance provided to Jews by non-Jews has taken a variety of forms, which can be grouped as follows:

• To house a Jew in one’s home, or in secular or religious institutions, away from the outside world and invisible to the public.
• Helping a Jew to pass himself off as a non-Jew by providing him with false identity papers or baptism certificates (issued by the clergy in order to obtain authentic documents).
• Helping Jews to get to a safe place or cross a border into a safer country, including accompanying adults and children on clandestine journeys in occupied territories and arranging border crossings.
• Temporary adoption of Jewish children (for the duration of the war).

The exact number of Jews saved with the help of non-Jews is unknown, but it is in the tens of thousands. In France, the number of Justes honoured is about 2500.

The Italians and the Japanese, although allies of Germany, did not participate in the «Final Solution». The Italian fascist regime introduced antisemitic laws on 3 August 1938 at the insistence of the Germans. However, the government of Mussolini refused to participate in the «Final Solution» and to deport the Italian Jews. Moreover, in the geographical areas they occupied, in France, Greece and Yugoslavia, the Italians protected the Jews and avoided their deportation. Thus, following the occupation of the South of France by the Germans and the Italians on 11 November 1942, the anti-Semitic legislation intended by the Nazis is challenged by the Consul General of Italy M. Calisse who then administers a significant part of the South-East (Nice, Savoie among others); he refuses to be affixed on the identity card the mention «JEW». Similarly, none of the few tens of Jews recorded in Corsica, occupied by the Italians from November 1942, were deported.

However, as soon as Mussolini fell in September 1943 and the Badoglio government came to power, the Germans seized Italy in order to prevent its territory from falling into the hands of the allies in a separate peace. Italian Jews and those who were under Italian protection were subjected to the threats of deportations that began. Nearly 8,000 Italian Jews, or almost 20% of the country’s Jewish population, disappeared in Auschwitz or were murdered in massacres such as the Fosse Ardeatine in Rome in March 1944, during which the Nazis murdered 335 people including 75 Jews.

The Japanese authorities were also tolerant towards the Jews until 1941 in Japan, and until 1943 in the territories they occupied. They refused to take any measures against them, as the Nazis had asked. Thus, Jews were able to find refuge in Japan until the spring of 1941 and Jews who were in China under Japanese occupation were treated well. However, from the summer of 1941 onwards, Jewish refugees from Japan were transferred to Shanghai without any action being taken against them until 18 February 1943 when refugees who had arrived after 1937 were forced to move to the Hongkew ghetto. It was actually a quarter of a dozen blocks quickly overcrowded with people from Germany, Austria, Czechoslovakia and Hungary. Several hundred refugees died of malnutrition and disease, but the living conditions were not comparable to those in the European ghettos under German control. A Nazi officer even visited the ghetto to prepare for the elimination of the Jews from Shanghai but the plan was not followed by the Japanese. The ghetto was liberated on 3 September 1945.

The Nazis distinguished Jewish Germans from German Jews, that is to say, according to them, who had «Jewish blood». According to the definitions issued on 14 November 1935, was considered as full Jewish any person from at least three Jewish grandparents, having 2 grandparents if he belonged to the Jewish religion or was married to a (e) Jew (ve) or was born of a marriage or an extramarital relationship between a Jew and a non-Jew after 15 September 1935.

Persons of Jewish origin were classified into two categories of “Mischlinge”, that is to say Métis:

• The “Mischlinge” of the first degree were from two Jewish grandparents;
• The second-degree “Mischlinge” were from a Jewish grandparent.

The «Mischlinge» were not allowed to join the Nazi party and all Nazi organizations (SA, SS, etc.). In 1940, the first-degree “Mischlinge” were expelled from the army. The expulsion order was renewed every year. The «Mischlinge» of the second degree, with only one Jewish great-parent, were allowed to remain in the army but could not become officers. They were also banned from civil service and certain professions.

The Nazis devised a plan to sterilize the “Mischlinge” in order to preserve “the purity of the Aryan race”, but nothing was finally undertaken.

During the world conflict, first-degree «Mischlinge» who had been imprisoned in concentration camps were sent to death centres.

Denial is the challenge to the reality of the Holocaust, the denial of the reality of the genocide of the Jews during the Second World War. This challenge attacks the extent of the genocide, the modalities, the will of the Nazis to commit it.

The Negationists start from a starting hypothesis which is not in fact one. Indeed, their idea is to demonstrate that the genocide of the Jews did not exist. They therefore take this as a given and then do everything to conclude that they are right.

The techniques used by the negationists are diverse . For example, it may be the obsessive search of “evidence” then considered decisive in disqualifying testimonies and documents considered by them as embarrassing. In fact, everything is studied by seeking the systematic disqualification on a detail of a testimony or document. Similarly, all sources are subject to caution and everything is, according to them, manipulation: confessions of Nazi dignitaries or SS during the various trials, testimonies, documents, deportation lists, statistics on disappeared Jewish communities. The testimonies and writings of the executors of the «Final Solution» are minimized: so are Himmler’s speeches in which he speaks of «extermination of the Jewish people». Other speeches or testimonies are interpreted in a sense that necessarily corresponds to the original idea. Thus, the terms used by the Nazis to cover up genocide which historians know are a deliberately coded language are taken literally (“evacuation”, for example, which in reality means liquidation). Systematically, the deniers make gas chambers of the rooms of stripping and disinfection, crematoria furnaces used to burn the corpses of the victims of typhus or other diseases. The technical argument is then used as a basis for the denialists who try to demonstrate by calling on self-appointed «experts» that mass murder by gases is technically impossible. Finally, the overall context is completely ignored. The actions of the Einsatzgruppen or the T4 program for elimination of the asocials that preceded the Shoah are forgotten. The deniers are obsessed with the ideas of conspiracy, fraud and falsification on a global scale that they would be the only ones to see and analyze all documents in relation to these obsessions.

The proponents of these discourses, initially called «revisionists», are now referred to as deniers. Indeed, they had themselves chosen the first term of «revisionists» thus claiming to be part of a historical process. In fact, the history written by historians is constantly revised by analyses and renewed issues in view of new possible sources or new research which use the rules of the profession of historian and historical criticism. The negationists do not use these rules, which are not only those of literary criticism or technical discussion «experts».[End of translation]

Les écrivains négationnistes ignorent le métier d’historien puisque leurs propos s’appuient sur des falsifications et des mensonges. C’est l’historien Henry Rousso qui, en 1987, décida de mettre un terme à l’ambiguïté de l’emploi du terme révisionnisme : « Le grand public découvre [en 1978] le milieu interlope des “révisionnistes”, un qualificatif qu’ils s’attribuent impunément : le révisionnisme de l’histoire étant une démarche classique chez les scientifiques, on préférera ici le barbarisme, moins élégant mais plus approprié, de “négationnisme”, car il s’agit bien d’un système de pensée, d’une idéologie et non d’une démarche scientifique ou même simplement critique.

Selon Pierre Vidal-Naquet , le discours des négationnistes s’appuie sur 6 points:

1. Il n’y a pas eu de génocide et l’instrument qui le symbolise, les chambres à gaz, n’a jamais existé.
2. La « Solution finale » ne fut jamais que l’expulsion des Juifs en direction de l’Est européen.
3. Le chiffre des victimes juives du nazisme est beaucoup plus faible qu’on ne l’a dit, éliminant de fait tout génocide ou tentative de génocide de la part de l’Allemagne nazie.
4. L’Allemagne hitlérienne ne porte pas la responsabilité majeure de la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Elle partage cette responsabilité, par exemple, avec les Juifs, ou même elle n’a pas de responsabilité du tout.
5. L’ennemi majeur du genre humain pendant les années trente et quarante n’est pas l’Allemagne nazie, mais l’URSS de Staline et le bolchevisme.
6. Le génocide est une invention de la propagande alliée, principalement juive, et tout particulièrement sioniste, que l’on peut expliquer aisément par une propension des Juifs à donner des chiffres imaginaires, mais aussi par leur volonté d’en tirer un profit financier.

De fait, ce genre de propos cache un discours idéologique. L’antisémitisme se cache derrière un discours antisioniste obsessionnel  qui refuse l’idée que les Juifs aient été victimes. Ceux-ci  auraient donc instrumentalisé un mensonge afin de parvenir à leurs fins. Le souhait des négationnistes est de faire disparaître la singularité liée au génocide. Il s’agit donc de banaliser, voire pour certains de réhabiliter le régime nazi ayant commis le génocide.

Il est évident que l’ensemble de la population allemande ne soutint pas Hitler dans sa politique de persécution des Juifs. Mais, de fait, il n’y a pas d’exemple connu d’une protestation élargie face à la manière dont ceux-ci furent traités. Il nous faut tout de même prendre en compte le poids de la terreur mise en place par les Nazis, lesquels menaçaient tous ceux qui manifestaient ouvertement leurs critiques à l’égard du régime. Il y eut toutefois des Allemands qui refusèrent le boycott du 1er avril 1933 et achetèrent dans les magasins juifs. D’autres, dont le nombre fut réduit, aidèrent des Juifs à se cacher et à échapper aux arrestations. Certains qui s’opposèrent à Hitler et aux Nazis ne trouvèrent rien à redire aux persécutions anti-juives.

Des voix du clergé s’élevèrent pour protester contre le sort réservé aux Juifs, mais rien ne fut comparable au discours prononcé en chaire par l’évêque de Münster, Mgr Von Galen, lequel s’indigna du sort réservé aux asociaux et handicapés dans le cadre du programme T4. Ainsi, le prévôt de la cathédrale de Berlin, Bernhard Lichtenberg priait publiquement et quotidiennement pour les Juifs. Il fut envoyé dans un camp de concentration. D’autres hommes d’Eglise furent internés pour avoir critiqué ou refusé de collaborer avec la politique antisémite nazie, mais la majorité du clergé allemand se soumit aux directives anti-juives et ne protesta pas publiquement, à l’image de la population allemande.

Les premières mesures prises par les Nazis à l’encontre des Juifs intervinrent en avril 1933 :

• 1er avril 1933 : boycott des magasins et commerces juifs par les Nazis
• 7 avril 1933 : la loi rétablissant le Service civil excluait les non-Aryens (définit par le 11 avril 1933 comme personne ayant un parent ou un grand-parent juif). Il y eut initialement des exceptions pour ceux ayant combattu pendant la Première Guerre mondiale et ceux qui avaient perdu un père ou un fils au combat pour l’Allemagne ou ses alliés durant cette Première Guerre mondiale.
• 7 avril 1933 : la loi portant sur l’admission aux professions de loi interdit l’admission des avocats non-Aryens au barreau. Elle interdisait également aux non-Aryens membres du barreau le droit de pratiquer. Des décisions similaires furent prises pour les assesseurs, les jurés et les juges de commerce.
• 22 avril 1933 : Le décret concernant les services des médecins au regard du plan de santé national interdisait le remboursement des dépenses aux patients qui  consultaient un médecin non-Aryen, à l’exception des médecins juifs vétérans de guerre ou ayant eut à souffrir de la guerre.
• 25 avril 1933 : la loi sur la surpopulation des écoles allemandes imposa aux étudiants juifs un numerus clausus dans les établissements secondaires à hauteur de 1,5% du corps étudiant. Dans les endroits où les Juifs représentaient plus de 5% de la population, ils purent constituer plus de 5% du corps étudiant. Comme pour les autres mesures, il exista des exceptions initiales pour les enfants de vétérans juifs de la guerre. Dans le cadre de cette loi, un étudiant était considéré comme juif  s’il avait deux parents non-Aryens.

Elles furent suivies par d’autres tout au long de la dictature nazie.

En France, le gouvernement de Vichy définit l’appartenance à la « race juive » dans deux statuts.

Le premier statut est édicté le 3 octobre 1940 et affirme dans son article 1 qu’ « est regardée comme juif toute personne issue de trois grands-parents juifs ou de deux grands-parents de la même race si son conjoint lui-même est juif ».

Le second statut du 2 juin 1941 modifie la définition en l’élargissant. Ainsi, l’article 1 annonce qu’est regardé comme Juif « Celui ou celle, appartenant ou non à une confession quelconque, qui est issu d’au moins trois grands-parents de race juive, ou de deux seulement si son conjoint est lui-même issu de deux grands-parents de race juive. Est regardé comme étant de race juive le grand-parent ayant appartenu à la religion juive ».

L’article 2 aggrave la précédente disposition en ajoutant qu’ « est regardé comme juif : celui ou celle qui appartient à la religion juive, ou y appartenait le 25 juin 1940, et qui est issu de deux grands-parents de race juive. La non-appartenance à la religion juive est établie par la preuve de l’adhésion à l’une des autres confessions reconnues par l’État avant la loi du 9 décembre 1905. Le désaveu ou l’annulation de la reconnaissance d’un enfant considéré comme Juif sont sans effet au regard des dispositions qui précèdent. »

La 1ère ordonnance allemande du 27 septembre 1940, dans son article 1, reconnaît comme juifs « ceux qui appartiennent ou appartenaient à la religion juive, ou qui ont plus de deux grands-parents juifs. Sont considérés comme juifs les grands-parents qui appartiennent ou appartenaient à la religion juive ».

Ainsi, la loi de Vichy proclame la notion de race juive alors que l’ordonnance allemande ne fait référence qu’à la religion juive.

La 3ème ordonnance allemande du 26 avril 1941 révise la définition précédente et dans son article 1 affirme qu’ « est considérée comme juive toute personne qui a au moins trois grands-parents de pure race juive. Est considéré « ipso jure » comme de pure race juive un grand-parent ayant appartenu à la communauté religieuse juive. Est considérée également comme juive toute personne issue de deux grands-parents de pure race juive et qui,

a- au moment de la publication de la présente ordonnance, appartient à la communauté religieuse juive ou y entre ultérieurement ;

ou

b- au moment de la publication de la présente ordonnance, a été mariée avec un Juif ou qui épouse ultérieurement un Juif.

En cas de doute, est considéré comme juive toute personne qui appartient ou a appartenu à la communauté religieuse juive. »

La 7ème ordonnance allemande du 24 mars 1942 donne une nouvelle définition du Juif :

« 1- Est considérée comme juive toute personne qui a au moins trois grands-parents de pure race juive. Est considéré ipso jure comme de pure race juive un grand-parent ayant appartenu à la religion juive. Est considérée également comme juive toute personne issue de deux grands-parents de pure race juive qui :

a- Le 25 juin 1940 appartenait à la religion juive ou qui y appartiendrait ultérieurement ; ou qui

b- Le 25 juin 1940 était mariée à un conjoint juif ou qui aurait épousé après cette date un conjoint juif.

En cas de doute, est considéré comme juive toute personne qui appartient ou a appartenu à la communauté religieuse juive. »

Serge Klarsfeld, auteur du Mémorial de la déportation des Juifs de France a édité les listes des déportés juifs. Les personnes qui allaient être déportées étaient ainsi inscrites sur des listes dressées par le service des Affaires juives de la Gestapo. Toutefois, des personnes ayant été déportées n’apparaissent pas sur les listes car rajoutées au dernier moment par les autorités nazies. Ainsi, d’après S. Klarsfeld, on estime à 76 000 le nombre de juifs déportés de France entre le 27 mars 1942 et le 18 août 1944. Ils furent, pour l’écrasante majorité (près de 74 000), déportés dans les 79 convois de déportés juifs partis principalement de Drancy mais aussi de camps du Loiret, de Compiègne ou encore d’Angers. A ces hommes et femmes, il faut ajouter les Juifs déportés du Nord et du Pas-de-Calais via la Belgique (environ 1000 personnes), les Juives épouses de prisonniers de guerre déportées à Bergen-Belsen avec leurs enfants (277 personnes), les Juifs déportés de Noé, Saint-Sulpice et Toulouse vers Buchenwald le 30 juillet 1944 (minimum de 350 personnes), les Juifs déportés de Clermont-Ferrand le 18 août 1944 vers Auschwitz (68 personnes au minimum), les Juifs déportés vers Auschwitz dans les convois « d’aryens » le 8 juillet 1942 et le 30 avril 1944 (100 personnes au minimum), les Juifs déportés individuellement (pas moins de 100 personnes) et les Juifs déportés dans les convois de résistants.

Parmi les déportés, plus de 11 000 enfants, dont environ 2 000 avaient moins de 6 ans.

Le nombre de survivants en 1945, dont la plupart avait été déportés en 1944, est estimé à environ 3800, soit 5 %.

Par nationalités, les Juifs d’origine polonaise furent les plus touchés puisque environ 25 000 furent déportés. Viennent ensuite les Allemands (environ 7 000), les Russes (environ 4 000), les Roumains et Autrichiens (environ 3 000 pour chaque nationalité), les Grecs (environ 1 500), les Turcs (environ 1 300), les Hongrois (environ 1 200).

Les Juifs français furent environ 24 700 dont au moins 8 000 étaient les enfants nés en France de parents étrangers ou apatrides et dont 8 000 environ étaient naturalisés.

Selon les chiffres les plus récents  les déportés politiques furent au nombre de 87 800, déportés principalement vers les camps de Buchenwald, Dachau, Mauthausen, Sachsenhausen pour les hommes et Ravensbrück pour les femmes. En 1945, près de 60 % d’entre eux étaient morts dans les camps nazis.

Les premiers camps d’internements français ouvrirent en mars 1939 afin d’héberger les réfugiés républicains espagnols dans le sud-ouest de la France à Rivesaltes, Récébedou, Noé, Argelès, Gurs par exemple.

Quand la guerre éclata en septembre 1939, beaucoup d’ Espagnols étaient retournés dans leur pays. Dès la déclaration de guerre leur place dans les camps fut rapidement occupée par des étrangers arrêtés par la police au cours d’une action d’envergure nationale pendant les premiers jours de l’état d’urgence. Ces 15 000 étrangers alors enfermés dans les camps français comprenaient des centaines d’éminents réfugiés antinazis. En mai 1940, quand les Allemands entrèrent en France, beaucoup de réfugiés étrangers, hommes et femmes susceptibles d’être ennemis ou d’espionner, furent à nouveau victimes d’ « internements administratifs » dans ces camps du sud-ouest, de la part des autorités françaises.

Parmi ces personnes, un grand nombre de Juifs étrangers, notamment allemands et autrichiens. Les Juifs étaient pris dans les filets comme les autres étrangers et leur judéité semble alors avoir accru leur vulnérabilité. Ordinairement apatrides, souvent sans argent, parlant avec un fort accent, les Juifs étrangers représentaient environ 70% des 40 000 civils demeurés internés en France non occupée vers la fin de 1940.

De fait, le dispositif des camps était en place et les fonctionnaires s’étaient habitués à rassembler de vastes groupes d’étrangers parmi lesquels les Juifs étaient l’élément dominant. Le changement de régime en juillet 1940 ne marqua donc pas une rupture radicale car la politique de Vichy à l’égard des réfugiés n’offrit pas de différences marquantes avec celle de la fin de la Troisième République, elle en fut la continuation et le renforcement, à la différence notable que le régime rendit plus légitime une expression des sentiments antijuifs en supprimant la loi et la coutume républicaines.

Après la défaite et sous l’occupation, de nouveaux camps d’internement ouvrirent en zone occupée à partir du moment où les Juifs furent pris pour cible à la fois par les autorités d’occupation mais aussi par les autorités françaises. C’est ainsi qu’ouvrirent les camps du Loiret, de Compiègne et de Drancy qui furent les principaux camps d’internement et de transit des Juifs déportés de France.

Le camp de Drancy

Le camp de Drancy fut le principal camps d’internement français par lesquels transitèrent les Juifs avant leur déportation. La cité de la Muette de Drancy, construite en forme de U en 1935-36 afin de servir de logements à loyers modérés pour l’office d’HLM de la Seine, accueillit dès août 1941 les premiers internés juifs raflés à Paris. C’est de là que partirent vers les camps de la mort 62 des 77 convois partis de France à partir des gares du Bourget (jusqu’au mois de juillet 1943) et de Bobigny transportant près de 65 000 personnes.

En 1942, 32 convois sur 43 sont partis de Drancy. Le seul convoi sur les 17 de l’année 1943 et les 14 de l’année1944 qui ne partit pas de Drancy fut celui du 11 août 1944 qui partit de Lyon.

Sur ces 62 convois, seuls 6 n’allèrent pas vers Auschwitz-Birkenau. Les convois 50 et 51 furent dirigés vers Maïdanek et Sobibor, les 52 et 53 vers Sobibor, le 73 vers Kaunas en Lituanie, le dernier, qui rapatriait en Allemagne Aloïs Brunner,  partit pour Buchenwald avec 51 déportés à bord.

Drancy fut géré par les autorités françaises jusqu’au mois de juillet 1943. Les trois officiers français qui se succédèrent à la direction du camp étaient sous la direction de la préfecture de police de la Seine. L’administration française du camp fut toutefois en permanence sous le contrôle de la Sicherheitpolizei (la police de sécurité) et du Sicherheitdienst (service de sécurité). A partir du 2 juillet 1943 et l’arrivée à la tête du camp du nazi Aloïs Brunner, le camp passa sous administration allemande et les gendarmes français furent cantonnés à un rôle de garde à l’extérieur du camp. Celui-ci fonctionna alors sur le modèle des camps de concentration allemands.

Les camps de Pithiviers et de Beaune-La-Rolande

Ces camps furent administrés par les autorités françaises comme une même entité et relevèrent de l’autorité du préfet du département du Loiret. Situés à 23 kilomètres l’un de l’autre ils étaient destinés à interner des Juifs. Les deux camps étaient surveillés chacun par une centaine de gendarmes et de douaniers.

Le camp de Pithiviers était situé à 500 m de la ville. Composé de 19 baraques dont deux pour l’infirmerie, il avait d’abord servi de « Fronstalag » pour les prisonniers de guerre français alors qu’il était initialement prévu pour les prisonniers de guerre allemands.

Le camp de Beaune-la-Rolande, situé sur un plateau à l’est du bourg, comprenait 18 baraques dont 14 pour les internés. Clôturé par une double rangée de barbelés, il s’étendait sur trois hectares.

Les premiers internés juifs, dirigés de la gare d’Austerlitz vers les camps du Loiret, arrivent à la suite des premières arrestations parisiennes du 14 mai 1941. 1 693 Juifs sont internés à Pithiviers, environ 2 000 à Beaune-La-Rolande.

Après les rafles parisiennes de juillet 1942, les familles avec enfants sont transférées en train dans les camps du Loiret, les camps sont alors surpeuplés et des épidémies se déclarent. Entre le 31 juillet et le 7 août 1942, quatre convois composés d’adolescents et d’adultes quittent les camps du Loiret pour Auschwitz. A chaque départ, les gendarmes séparent les femmes et les enfants à coups de crosse. Les 1 800 enfants de Pithiviers et les 1 500 de Beaune-La-Rolande furent maintenus dans les camps du Loiret, arrachés à leurs parents, livrés à eux-mêmes. Il furent ensuite déportés dans 7 convois partis de Drancy entre le 19 août et le 2 septembre 1942. Ainsi, les enfants des camps du Loiret sont transférés à Drancy par 4 convois entre le 19 août et le 25 août 1942.

Le jour même du premier convoi qui transfert les enfants du Loiret à Drancy , une partie de ces enfants est déportée de Drancy à Auschwitz par le convoi n° 21. Ainsi, jusqu’au convoi n° 27 en date du 2 septembre 1942, les enfants orphelins des camps du Loiret sont déportés et assassinés immédiatement à Auschwitz.

6 convois partirent de Pithiviers : les convois n° 4 du 25 juin 1942, n°6 du 17 juillet, n°13 du 31 juillet, n°14 du 3 août, n°16 du 7 août et enfin le convoi n°35 du 21 septembre 1942.

2 convois partirent de Beaune-la-Rolande : le convoi n° 5 du 28 juin 1942 et le convoi n° 15 du 5 août 1942.

Le camp de Compiègne

Situé dans un faubourg de Compiègne, qui à l’époque s’appelait Royallieu, le camp formait un quadrilatère de 400 mètres de côté. Mis en place par les Allemands qui ont utilisé les casernes existantes, le camp servit en premier lieu pour les prisonniers français et britanniques avant de devenir à partir du 22 juin 1941 un camp d’internement. Le camp était cloisonné en quatre sous-camps, accueillant chacun différentes catégories de détenus. La partie la plus importante et la plus stable était celle réservée aux détenus politiques, elle occupait une douzaine de bâtiments. À côté de ces « politiques » il y avait les détenus étrangers, américains et russes qui étaient internés dans des bâtiments spéciaux.

Les Juifs étaient à l’écart, ils subissaient les conditions d’internement les plus dures. Le secteur juif était séparé du reste du camp par une double palissade qui les privait de tout contact avec les autres détenus. Le camp de Compiègne fut le seul camp de transit en France à n’avoir jamais dépendu que de l’administration allemande. Ce camp est d’abord connu pour avoir été le premier centre de déportation des prisonniers politiques français.

Les Juifs représentèrent environ 12% de la population des internés. Ils furent internés à Compiègne surtout au début de l’Occupation ; par la suite, ils étaient plus systématiquement envoyés dans le camp de Drancy.

Le sous-camp juif du camp de Compiègne fut inauguré dans la nuit du 12 au 13 décembre 1941 par le transfert des 743 Juifs arrêtés le même jour, rejoints dans leur train par 300 étrangers extraits de Drancy. Un va et vient d’internés s’établit alors entre Drancy et Compiègne et les transferts d’un camp à l’autre furent nombreux.

49 860 déportés sont partis de Compiègne dans 54 convois dont 52 vers les camps de concentration, déportant en moyenne un millier de personnes à chaque fois entre mars 1942 et août 1944. Ces convois furent de plus en plus nombreux au fil des années : 5 en 1942, 22 en 1943, 27 en 1944. Les destinations de ces convois furent les camps de concentration de Buchenwald (16 convois), Mauthausen (8 convois), Ravensbrück (5 convois), etc. C’est également de là que partirent  les deux premiers convois de déportation de Juifs à destination d’Auschwitz, le 27 mars et le 5 juin1942.

Le camp des Milles

Au début de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, en septembre 1939, le gouvernement français prend la décision d’interner les ressortissants du Reich, pourtant pour la plupart antifascistes ayant fui le nazisme.  Considérés comme « sujets ennemis », les internés sont victimes d’un mélange de xénophobie, d’absurdité et de désordres administratifs. Ils sont internés, sous commandement militaire français, dans la Tuilerie des Milles, au sud d’Aix-en-Provence, usine alors désaffectée, réquisitionnée dès le début du conflit.

En juin 1940, s’ouvre la seconde période du camp, suite à la défaite de la France, à la signature de l’armistice et l’arrivée au pouvoir de Pétain.

À partir de juillet 1940, le camp devient un camp d’internement pour les « indésirables », et de transit, rapidement surpeuplé. En novembre 1940, passé sous l’autorité du Ministère de l’Intérieur français, c’est le seul camp qui offre un faible espoir d’une émigration loin de l’Europe. 39 nationalités sont représentées dans le camp. Dans les premiers mois, certains internés en bénéficieront pour rallier les États-Unis, l’Amérique du Sud ou même l’Asie. Ils trouvent, à l’intérieur même du camp, l’appui de particuliers, d’organisations locales et internationales qui mettent en place des filières régulières ou illégales.

Les conditions d’internement, déjà précaires, se dégradent encore : maladies, promiscuité, nourriture insuffisante, angoisses face aux dangers qui cernent les internés, dans l’attente d’un hypothétique visa, de la fuite, et de la liberté, enfin, recouvrée, dans ce pays, la France, qui aurait dû les protéger …

Au cours de l’été 1942, la troisième période du camp des Milles est la plus tragique : l’ancienne tuilerie devient un camp de déportation dans lequel les juifs déjà internés et ceux raflés dans la région sont regroupés pour être déportés, via Drancy, à Auschwitz.

Le régime de Pétain, ouvertement antisémite, va jusqu’à fournir aux nazis les enfants et au camp des Milles, une centaine sont dans les wagons de déportation. Le plus jeune avait un an. Au total, près de deux mille hommes, femmes et enfants juifs sont alors déportés.

Le terme « antisémitisme » définit exclusivement l’hostilité aux Juifs. Ce terme, né dans les années 1860 en Allemagne, fut employé et propagé par le publiciste allemand Wilhelm Marr, auteur d’un pamphlet anti-juif intitulé « La victoire du judaïsme sur la germanité considérée du point de vue non confessionnel » publié en 1879. Marr, avec de nombreux contemporains comme Ernest Renan en France, considérait alors que les Juifs appartenaient à une « race sémite », or l’adjectif sémite s’applique à une famille linguistique (l’hébreu, l’arabe, l’araméen, le babylonien, l’assyrien, l’éthiopien) et non à des peuples.

Marr limita l’acception « antisémite » aux seuls Juifs. Ainsi, depuis son invention, ce terme a uniquement signifié la haine des Juifs. Il est aujourd’hui entré dans l’usage commun comme qualifiant  exclusivement l’hostilité à l’endroit des Juifs. Au moment ou Marr propage le terme « antisémitisme », l’antisémitisme moderne, à savoir la haine du juif en tant que « race » prend son essor. Il est contemporain de la naissance et de l’affirmation des Etats-nations, parfois envisagés comme « racialement homogènes », les Juifs apparaissant alors comme un « corps étranger » à la nation mettant en danger l’unité de celle-ci et dont il convient de se séparer. C’est notamment le discours du mouvement « völkisch » dans l’Allemagne de la fin du XIXème siècle.

Le fait que le terme antisémitisme soit le fruit d’une pensée racialiste et soit néanmoins passé dans le langage courant révèle l’ambiguïté  du terme qui accrédite en effet le mythe même qu’il entend combattre en donnant du poids au fantasme d’une coupure entre Aryens et Sémites.

Les fondements des discours antisémites modernes plongent d’abord leurs racines dans les écrits des Pères de l’Eglise que furent Saint-Jean Chrysostome ou Saint Augustin par exemple. Toutefois, c’est au Moyen-Âge, que se répand une vision chrétienne diabolisante du juif. Le tournant dans l’histoire de l’anti-judaïsme chrétien est contemporain des Croisades aux XIIème et XIIIème siècles. S’installe en effet, en Europe occidentale, une politique de mise au ban des juifs alors que se diffusent des mythes qui accréditent leur nature satanique.

Ceux-ci se livreraient notamment au meurtre d’enfants chrétiens dans le cadre de rites savamment programmés, tantôt pour rejouer la crucifixion de Jésus (meurtre rituel), tantôt pour boire leur sang ou voler leurs organes.

Pour l’historien français Jean Delumeau (in « La Peur en Occident », 1978, chapitre 8, « le juif mal absolu »), le mythe du juif cannibale constitue, avec les sorcières, le diable ou la peste, l’une des grandes peurs de l’Occident chrétien au Moyen-Age et à La Renaissance. Ce fantasme trouve son origine dans l’activité très tôt réservée aux Juifs par les Princes et l’Eglise : le commerce de l’argent. C’est en effet là que naquit l’idée selon laquelle les Juifs, parce qu’ils faisaient des prêts à intérêts (le prêt à intérêt était interdit par l’Eglise aux Chrétiens et donc dévolu aux Juifs), suçaient par la même occasion le sang économique (l’argent) des Chrétiens. Etant de plus accusés de se nourrir du sang des enfants chrétiens qu’ils assassineraient, de suceurs d’argent, les Juifs devinrent suceurs de sang.

Dès lors se développent des accusations contre les Juifs. Celle de meurtre rituel est attestée pour la première fois en 1144 à Norwich en Angleterre quand des Juifs sont accusés d’avoir rejoué, avec un enfant, la passion du Christ, liant donc meurtre rituel et déicide. Ce crime aurait été prémédité par une assemblée de rabbins, donnant ainsi naissance à l’idée de complot qui se diffusa rapidement dans toute l’Europe. Elle fut reprise et popularisée au XIXème siècle par le faux créé par la police politique du Tsar Alexandre III,  » Les Protocoles des Sages de Sion », lesquels s’inscrivaient dans une longue tradition de faux complotistes et antisémites du XIXème siècle, dont ils ne faisaient que reprendre les thèmes. La description précise d’un complot mondial apparaît ainsi dans l’ouvrage de l’abbé Barruel, les « Mémoires pour servir à l’histoire du jacobinisme », paru en 1797. L’accusation centrale est portée contre des francs-maçons, à qui un rôle prépondérant est réservé dans le déclenchement des événements révolutionnaires, mais il n’y est pas fait mention des Juifs.

C’est en Allemagne, que le thème du « complot juif » émergea réellement avec le roman, « Biarritz » de Hermann Goedsche, publié en 1868. Il y décrit une assemblée nocturne tenue dans le cimetière juif de Prague, au cours de laquelle les chefs des douze tribus d’Israël, sous la présidence du diable, auraient annoncé que les Juifs allaient dominer la Terre. En France, un faux largement inspiré par ce roman fut publié en juillet 1881 par Le Contemporain sous le titre Discours du grand Rabbin. L’ouvrage rencontra un certain succès et tout un panel de livres paraît à cette époque, développant la même idée.

A partir du XIIème siècle, naît une légende noire selon laquelle les juifs volent, mutilent ou brûlent l’hostie afin de tuer Jésus une fois de plus. Cette légende s’amplifia après le concile du Latran de 1215 qui consacra l’eucharistie.

L’accusation de cannibalisme, ou « libelle du sang », apparut, quant à elle, pour la  première fois à Fulda en Allemagne en 1235 : les 5 enfants d’un meunier chrétien ayant été retrouvés morts, deux juifs furent accusés et trente familles juives égorgées. Il s’agissait là de déshumaniser les juifs en les accusant du plus inhumain des crimes.

Ces accusations faisaient suite à de terribles massacres notamment à l’occasion des croisades dans ce qui est aujourd’hui l’Allemagne (à Speyer, Cologne, Trèves et Worms en 1096 lors de la première croisade par exemple quand les Juifs furent assassinés par milliers ; ou encore 1248 lors de la septième croisade où le massacre des Juifs de Worms marqua les esprits du temps.).

Au XIXème siècle, dans le cadre des luttes nationalitaires et de la formation des Etats-nations cette vision diabolisante se sécularise et débouche sur ce qui peut apparaître comme une paranoïa collective avec la distinction alors très présente que l’on pourrait résumer par « Eux et nous » débouchant systématiquement sur l’idée de séparation, de disparition, voire de mort. Cette évolution est notamment liée à la biologisation de la Nation, comprise comme un corps homogène que viendraient corrompre et souiller les Juifs. Cette conception débouche sur le discours génocidaire : « il faut extirper les juifs de la Nation » lesquels sont souvent accusés de comploter contre les intérêts du pays, contre le pays lui-même.

Le racisme qualifie la haine de tous ceux dont on considère qu’ils appartiennent à un groupe défini comme racialement différent.

L’antisémitisme, qui qualifie la haine des Juifs, est presque toujours couplé à l’idée de conspiration, de complot, de sang souillé et donne naissance à une pensée et à un discours diabolisants, voire de mort. De plus, une fascination certaine pour l’objet de peur agite les antisémites qui, au contraire des racistes qui méprisent et haïssent, ne méprisent pas tout en haïssant.

Le philosophe Emmanuel Lévinas comprenait ainsi la différence entre racisme et antisémitisme : « L’antisémitisme n’est ni la simple hostilité qu’éprouve une majorité à l’égard d’une minorité, ni seulement une xénophobie, ni un quelconque racisme, fût-il la raison ultime de ces phénomènes de lui dérivés. Car il est la répugnance à l’inconnu du psychisme d’autrui, au mystère de son intériorité ou, par-delà toute agglomération en ensemble et toute organisation en organisme, à la pure proximité de l’autre homme, c’est à dire la socialité elle-même » ( « L’Au delà du verset. Lectures et discours talmudiques » 1982.)