History Extra Podcast
Episode: What should we do with the Nazis? The Road to the Nuremberg Trials
Date: November 16, 2025
Host: Dave Musgrove | Guest: Philippe Sands (international lawyer, author of East West Street and The Ratline)

Main Theme & Purpose

This episode launches a four-part series on the Nuremberg Trials, exploring the remarkable journey from the end of World War II to the creation and commencement of the first and largest international war crimes tribunal in history. The discussion focuses on the legal, moral, and political forces driving the Allies to choose a trial for Nazi leaders, the invention of international criminal law, and the complex personalities and rapid collaboration that shaped the Nuremberg process.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Urgency and Origins of the Nuremberg Trials

• Preparations Began Early (1942): Even before the war ended, exiled governments were planning for justice, supported by Britain, the US, and the Soviet Union.
  • Quote: “Already in 1942, efforts were underway… committing to the prosecution of Nazi criminals for crimes committed on their occupied territories.” – Philippe Sands [03:22]
• Yalta Conference Agreement: At Yalta (Feb 1945), Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin agreed trials were essential. Churchill was reluctant—initially preferring summary executions—while Roosevelt and Stalin favored a trial for symbolic reasons.
  • Quote: “Churchill had to be brought in kicking and screaming. His desired option was just to line them up and shoot them.” – Philippe Sands [03:53]

2. Crafting International Justice: Who and What to Charge?

• Leadership Targeted: Decision to try top Nazi leaders and industrialists, not "low hanging fruit." 24 were selected.
  • Quote: “They wanted people who had planned, who’d been in government positions or who were serious industrialists.” – Philippe Sands [04:44]
• Creating New Crimes: War crimes were the only recognized offense. New crimes had to be drafted:
  • Crimes Against Humanity (from Hirsch Lauterpacht)
  • Crimes Against Peace (now ‘aggression’)
  • Genocide (from Raphael Lemkin, later added to the indictment after lobbying)
  • Quote: “[They] essentially invented new crimes—crimes against humanity, what they then called crimes against peace… and as a subhead of war crimes, genocide.” – Philippe Sands [05:25]

3. Language, Law, and Precedent: Assembling the Statute

• International Negotiations in London: Four-power negotiation produced the Nuremberg Statute, a legal first requiring compromise, translation, and adaptation of different legal traditions.
• Semicolon Controversy: Jurisdiction limited to crimes after Sept 1, 1939 (start of WWII), influenced by a punctuation debate in Article 6 (semicolon vs. comma).
  • Quote: “The difference between a semicolon and a comma… will determine whether the jurisdiction goes back to ’33 or only 1st of September 1939.” – Philippe Sands [10:14]

4. Accelerated Pace and Pragmatic Creation

• Remarkable Speed:
  • Statute negotiated in weeks (June-August 1945); indictments issued October 1945; trial opened Nov 20, 1945.
  • Quote: “They gave birth to international criminal law in a matter of weeks… It is a stunning achievement.” – Philippe Sands [17:30, 18:17]
• Why the Rush:
  • Allied desire to resolve the process quickly (six months or less), aiming for closure and clear messaging to both Germans and the world.
  • Quote: “You’ll be back doing your day job in the English courts within six months. Everyone wanted this done and dusted within months.” – Philippe Sands [18:27]

5. Pioneering Legal Concepts: Humanity, Genocide, and Individual Influence

• Personalities Matter:
  • Lauterpacht (Crimes Against Humanity) and Lemkin (Genocide)—both from Lviv, Ukraine—were instrumental in shaping international law.
  • Quote: “For the first time in human history, the concept of crimes against humanity is put into international law. That was sort of accidental.” – Philippe Sands [14:53]
• Legacy:
  • Nuremberg’s principles underpin modern international tribunals (Rwanda, Yugoslavia, etc.).
  • Quote: “All roads lead to Nuremberg… it’s sort of miraculous that they managed it in just literally a few weeks.” – Philippe Sands [13:54]

6. Selection of Defendants and Limits of Justice

• Who Was Tried:
  • United Nations War Crimes Commission compiled lists—ultimately focusing on top leaders (Goering, Doenitz, Hans Frank, etc.), excluding those dead or not in custody.
• Symbolic vs Comprehensive:
  • Trials had a symbolic dimension; impossible to try every perpetrator (practical limits; focus on “the top 24”).
  • Quote: “With all these international criminal trials... they sort of have a symbolic function. You can’t put on trial tens of thousands of people. It’s just too time consuming.” – Philippe Sands [28:32]

7. Practicalities and Symbolism of Nuremberg

• Choosing Nuremberg:
  • Site of Nazi rallies and race laws symbolized evil of the regime.
  • The Palace of Justice survived the war, providing a practical courtroom.
  • Quote: “Nuremberg was chosen for symbolic reasons. Nuremberg was where the race laws had been adopted. Nuremberg was the rallying ground of the Nazis…” – Philippe Sands [35:05]
• Propaganda Aims & German Public:
  • The Allies aimed to visibly demonstrate the regime’s crimes to the German population and promote Allied unity.
  • Quote: “A large part of the trial was intended to convince the German people of the crimes of the regime, as well as to show that there was a solidarity amongst the Allies.” – Philippe Sands [35:38]

8. Logistics of the Tribunal

• Building the Courtroom:
  • Needed novel arrangements: multi-language translation, multiple prosecution teams, a large dock for defendants.
  • Simultaneous interpretation (never before done), physical transformation of the Palace of Justice.
  • Quote: “You needed to produce a courtroom which was configured differently... and most significantly, simultaneous interpretation…” – Philippe Sands [38:03]

9. Victor’s Justice and Unpunished Crimes

• No Allied Defendants:
  • Only German (and some Austrian/collaborators) were tried—Allied actions (e.g., Dresden, Hiroshima) excluded, raising charges of “victor’s justice.”
  • Quote: “It was justice going in one direction only… this was a form of victor’s justice.” – Philippe Sands [24:29]

10. Human Stories and Ongoing Legacy

• Personal Archives:
  • Philippe Sands describes working with Nazi leaders’ descendants (Hans Frank’s son Niklas and Otto Wächter’s son Horst), unearthing invaluable archives and family stories.
  • Quote: “It was 10,000 pages of documents... it gives a real insight into life at the top Nazi table.” – Philippe Sands [29:31]
• Honorary Degree Revoked:
  • Recent anecdote: Hans Frank’s honorary law degree (University of Modena) rescinded in 2025, 89 years after its award, showing how Nuremberg’s legacy endures.
  • Quote: “You think that these stories and legacies come to an end, but they don’t. They continue to work their magic 89 years later.” – Philippe Sands [32:16]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

| Timestamp | Speaker | Quote | |-----------|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 03:53 | Philippe Sands | “Churchill had to be brought in kicking and screaming. His desired option was just to line them up and shoot them.” | | 05:25 | Philippe Sands | “They essentially invented new crimes—crimes against humanity, what they then called crimes against peace... and genocide.” | | 10:14 | Philippe Sands | “The difference between a semicolon and a comma... will determine whether the jurisdiction goes back to ’33 or only 1st of September 1939.” | | 13:54 | Philippe Sands | "All roads lead to Nuremberg... it's sort of miraculous that they managed it in just literally a few weeks." | | 14:53 | Philippe Sands | "For the first time in human history, the concept of crimes against humanity is put into international law." | | 17:30 | Philippe Sands | "They gave birth to international criminal law in a matter of weeks... It is a stunning achievement." | | 18:27 | Philippe Sands | "Everyone wanted this done and dusted within months." | | 24:29 | Philippe Sands | "It was justice going in one direction only... this was a form of victor’s justice." | | 28:32 | Philippe Sands | "With all these international criminal trials... they sort of have a symbolic function. You can’t put on trial tens of thousands of people." | | 29:31 | Philippe Sands | "It was 10,000 pages of documents... it gives a real insight into life at the top Nazi table." | | 32:16 | Philippe Sands | "You think that these stories and legacies come to an end, but they don’t. They continue to work their magic 89 years later."| | 35:05 | Philippe Sands | "Nuremberg was chosen for symbolic reasons. Nuremberg was where the race laws had been adopted." | | 36:31 | Philippe Sands | "Winston Churchill wanted them lined up and shot... for different reasons Roosevelt and Stalin wanted a trial to show that we were different from the Nazis." |

Timeline of Major Segments

• [02:24] Introduction and purpose of the Nuremberg series (hosts and Philippe Sands)
• [03:22–05:25] Early planning and origins of the idea of war crimes trials
• [06:12–11:10] Negotiating the Nuremberg Statute: legal issues, new crimes, jurisdiction debates
• [13:54] Legacy of the Statute—future tribunals modeled on Nuremberg
• [14:09–16:54] The role of Lauterpacht and Lemkin; drafting crimes against humanity/genocide
• [17:26–18:27] Remarkable speed in organizing the trial; Allied rationale
• [22:12–24:29] The precedents (or lack thereof): Versailles, “victor’s justice”
• [25:33–30:40] How defendants were selected; discussion of Otto Wächter and Hans Frank
• [32:40–34:57] Logistics: defendants’ incarceration; organization within the Palace of Justice
• [35:05–35:38] Reasons for choosing Nuremberg as venue; symbolic/practical factors
• [36:31] Allied debates about summary vs. judicial justice
• [38:03–39:45] Creating the multilingual, multinational courtroom environment
• [39:45–40:59] Illustrative anecdote: a young French lawyer and postwar conditions
• [Approx. 41:00+] Wrap-up and preview of Part 2

Conclusion

This episode provides a dynamic, accessible introduction to the origins and setup of the Nuremberg Trials, blending the thrilling speed and complexity of postwar justice with deep insights into the formation of international criminal law. It highlights not only the pivotal historical forces at play, but also the influential role of determined individuals—many with personal ties to the war’s horrors—who shaped our modern concepts of justice and accountability.

The episode closes by reminding listeners that the logistical, legal, and moral aftermath of WWII catalyzed decisions and innovations that echo to this day, with the promise of future discussion about the trial itself and its global legacy in forthcoming episodes.