1,250,000 Jews, obliterating the Jewish population of a vast region in Eastern Europe, comes as close to genocide as possible. Had the defendants been charged with genocide, the end result likely would have been identical. Because of the Cold War and the need for a “pro-Western” Germany as a bulwark against Soviet expansionism, most of the sentences eventually were commuted: four defendants were executed, but the rest were released by 1958—having served a mere ten years. The moral: politics trumps law whether the law is crimes against humanity or genocide. Lemkin’s success at Nuremberg proved pyrrhic, as the legal subtleties gave way before “higher” interests. Irvin-Erickson also suggests that Lemkin influenced the prosecutors at Nuremberg to utilize the concept of conspiracy (pp. 145–47). This is, however, questionable. The inclusion of conspiracy in the charge originated in the U.S. War Department in late 1944, largely through the persistence of then Lieutenant Colonel Murray Bernays. Further, it is most unlikely that Justice Robert H. Jackson, a former U.S. Attorney General, needed enlightenment on the scope of conspiracy law. Lemkin’s vision was an expanded use of the genocide concept in future; Bernays’ was the idea that if organizations such as the Gestapo and SS were named and convicted as criminal organizations, proof of membership would suffice for future convictions. But no one was prosecuted and convicted after the Nuremberg trials purely on the basis of membership. Irvin-Erickson notes that in the end, Lemkin considered his efforts to prevent genocide a failure. Lemkin wrote, “The fact is that the rain of my work fell on a fallow plain, only this rain was a mixture of the blood and tears of eight million people throughout the world. Included also were the tears of my parents and my friends” (p. 229). Although Lemkin was repeatedly nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, he never was so honored (nor is the prize awarded posthumously). One can only speculate that his early death precluded deserved recognition.

中文翻译：

---

苏联与联合国灭绝种族罪公约的破译者安东·魏斯·温特

1,250,000名犹太人使东欧大片地区的犹太人人口丧生，这使他们尽可能接近种族灭绝。如果被告被指控犯有种族灭绝罪，最终结果可能会完全相同。由于冷战以及需要“亲西方”的德国作为抵制苏联扩张主义的堡垒，最终大多数判决被减刑：四名被告被处决，但其余被释放至1958年-仅服役了十年。道德：无论法律是危害人类罪还是种族灭绝罪，政治都凌驾于法律之上。莱姆金在纽伦堡的成功证明是痛苦的，因为法律上的微妙之处在“更高”的利益之前就已经放弃了。欧文·埃里克森（Irvin-Erickson）还建议，莱姆金（Lemkin）影响了纽伦堡的检察官，利用了串谋的概念（第145-47页）。但是，这是有问题的。阴谋包括在指控中，起源于1944年后期的美国战争部，主要是由于当时的中校穆雷·伯奈斯上校的坚持。此外，前美国总检察长罗伯特·H·杰克逊法官不太可能需要对合谋法的范围有所启发。莱姆金的愿景是在将来广泛使用种族灭绝的概念；Bernays的想法是，如果诸如Gestapo和SS之类的组织被命名为犯罪组织并被定罪为犯罪组织，则其成员身份证明足以满足未来的定罪要求。但是在纽伦堡审判之后，没有人纯粹是根据成员身份被起诉和定罪的。Irvin-Erickson指出，最后，Lemkin认为他为防止种族灭绝所做的努力是失败的。莱姆金（Lemkin）写道：“事实是，我的作品雨落在休憩的平原上，只是这场雨是全世界八百万人流血与泪水的混合物。还包括父母和朋友的眼泪”（第229页）。尽管莱姆金曾多次获得诺贝尔和平奖提名，但他从来没有像现在这样获得过荣誉（死后也没有获得该奖项）。只能推测他的早逝使他不应该得到承认。