| Description |
1 online resource (xv, 306 pages) : illustrations (some color) |
| Contents |
Intro -- Acknowledgements -- Contents -- Editors and Contributors -- Abbreviations -- List of Figures -- Part I Introduction -- 1 Honest Errors in Combat Decision-Making: State of Our Knowledge 75 Years after the Hostage Case -- 1.1 Introduction -- 1.2 Devastating Northern Norway and Forcibly Evacuating Its Inhabitants (Chaps. 2-4) -- 1.3 Trying Rendulic and Developing the No Second-Guessing Rule (Chaps. 5-8) -- 1.4 Assessing an Error's Reasonableness (Chaps. 9-11) -- 1.5 Conclusion -- References -- Part II Devastating Northern Norway and Forcibly Evacuating Its Inhabitants |
|
2 Occupied Norway 1940-1945: A Brief Background to Hostage -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 1940: Norway Attacked and Occupied -- 2.3 The German Occupation Regime in Norway -- 2.4 Barbarossa, Finland, and the Northern Front -- 2.5 The Commanders and Their Troops -- 2.6 Preparing for the Offensive in the North-June-October 1944 -- 2.7 October-November 1944: The Petsamo-Kirkenes Operation -- 2.8 Brief Note on Historiography -- References -- 3 Rendulic and the Military Necessity Defence in Hostage: Did He Speak the Truth? -- 3.1 Introduction -- 3.2 Rendulic's Post Factum Narratives |
|
3.3 View from the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht and the Wehrmachtführungsstab -- 3.4 The 20th Mountain Army and the Wehrmachtsbefehlshaber Norwegen -- 3.5 Allied Planning and Options-Naval Landings? -- 3.6 Allied Planning and Options-The Red Army -- 3.6.1 A Soviet Offensive from the Tana Positions? -- 3.6.2 A Soviet Offensive Over Finnish or Swedish Territory Towards Troms County? -- 3.7 Concluding Remarks -- References -- 4 Devastation and Forced Evacuation: The Actors and Their Motives -- 4.1 Introduction -- 4.2 Terboven's Claw -- 4.3 Military Prerequisites |
|
4.4 Organisation of the "Voluntary" Evacuation -- 4.5 Decision to Forcibly Evacuate -- 4.6 Motives -- References -- Part III Trying Rendulic and Developing the No Second-Guessing Rule -- 5 The Inclusion of Finnmark's Devastation and Forced Evacuation Charge in Hostage -- 5.1 Introduction -- 5.2 Collecting Evidence from a Distance -- 5.3 Cooperation and Misunderstandings -- 5.4 Preparing the Case -- 5.5 Reactions to the Verdict -- References -- 6 The Adjudication and Findings of Finnmark's Devastation Charge in Hostage -- 6.1 Introduction -- 6.2 Background: The Charges |
|
6.3 The Opening Statements -- 6.4 The Prosecution Case: Witnesses and Evidence -- 6.5 Rendulic on the Stand: The Defence Case -- 6.6 The Prosecution's Cross-Examination of Rendulic -- 6.7 Witnesses and Evidence for the Defence -- 6.8 The Judgment on the Devastation Charge -- 6.9 Accounting for the Decision on the Devastation of Finnmark in the Tribunal: Military Necessity in the Law of Armed Conflict of 1947 -- 6.10 Critiquing the Decision in Hostage: Prosecution Missteps and the Decision-Making Process of the Tribunal -- 6.11 Conclusion -- References -- 7 The Genesis and Significance of the Law of War "Rendulic Rule" |
| Summary |
This book marks the 75th anniversary of the 1948 Hostage Case in which a US military tribunal in Nuremberg acquitted General Lothar Rendulic of devastating Northern Norway on account of his honest factual error. The volume critically reappraises the law and facts underlying his trial, the no second-guessing rule in customary international humanitarian law (IHL) that is named after the general himself, and the assessment of modern battlefield decisions. Using recently discovered documents, this volume casts major doubts on Rendulics claim that he considered the regions total devastation and the forcible evacuation of all of its inhabitants imperatively demanded by military necessity at the time. This books analysis of court records reveals how the tribunal failed to examine relevant facts or explain the Rendulic Rules legal origin. This anthology shows that, despite the Hostage Cases ambiguity and occasional suggestions to the contrary, objective reasonableness forms part of the reasonable commander test under IHL and the mistake of fact defence under international criminal law (ICL) to which the rule has given rise. This collection also identifies modern warfares characteristicshuman judgment, de-empathetic battlespace, and institutional biasthat may make it problematic to deem some errors both honest and reasonable. The Rendulic Rule embodies an otherwise firmly established admonition against judging contentious battlefield decisions with hindsight. Nevertheless, it was born of a factually ill-suited case and continues to raise significant legal as well as ethical challenges today. The most comprehensive study of the Rendulic Rule ever to appear in English, this multi-disciplinary anthology will appeal to researchers and practitioners of IHL and ICL, as well as military historians and military ethicists and offers ground-breaking new research. Nobuo Hayashi is affiliated to the Centre for International and Operational Law at the Swedish Defence University in Stockholm, Sweden. Carola Lingaas is affiliated to the Faculty of Social Studies at VID Specialized University in Oslo, Norway |
| Subject |
Rendulić, Lothar -- Trials, litigation, etc
|
|
Hostage Trial, Nuremberg, Germany, 1947-1949.
|
|
Germany -- Nuremberg.
|
| Genre/Form |
Trials, litigation, etc.
|
| Form |
Electronic book
|
| Author |
Hayashi, Nobuo.
|
|
Lingaas, Carola, 1974-
|
| ISBN |
9789462656116 |
|
9462656118 |
|
