•
Rating: 'Nazi Hunters' is a documentary-style series presented by History Channel between 2010 and 2011, which recounts how the historical events regarding the hunt of military and particularly Nazi war criminals who escaped capture at the end of World War II unfolded.
It should be specified that the series, which ultimately had only one season, tells both cases where the 'hunt' was successful (as in the case of Adolf Eichmann) and others that, due to various circumstances, ended in failure and the lack of capture, such as in the case of Joseph Mengele.
One of these episodes is perhaps more relevant and contingent than the others to the events that occurred during World War II in our country, Italy, as it is dedicated to the capture of the war criminal, Gestapo agent, and SS captain Erich Priebke.
Known in Hennigsdorf, a small town northwest of Berlin in 1913, Priebke joined the National Socialist Workers' Party in 1933; in 1936, he became part of the Gestapo, and from 1941, thanks to his knowledge of the Italian language, he was transferred to our country. He served as an interpreter at the German embassy in Rome, head of the Gestapo in Brescia, and finally Captain of the SS in Rome, under the direct command of Lieutenant Colonel Herbert Kappler.
The episode in which he was a protagonist, and for which he will infamously be remembered in history, is the massacre of the Ardeatine Caves, the killing of 335 Italian civilians and soldiers brutally executed in Rome on March 24, 1944, by German occupation troops as a reprisal for the partisan attack on Via Rasella the previous day, in which 33 German soldiers were killed. The event is undoubtedly the 'symbol' of the harshness of the German occupation not only in the city of Rome but throughout Italy, and it is still commemorated today both institutionally and memorially.
According to historical reconstructions, the massacre was ordered by Adolf Hitler himself and consequently by Lieutenant Colonel Herbert Kappler, who, captured by the British at the war's end, was tried by an Italian military tribunal in 1947 and sentenced to life imprisonment. The issue was particularly controversial because, on several occasions, Federal German institutions intervened to request clemency, and in prison, Kappler continued to receive a pension guaranteed by the Bonn government. Hospitalized at the Celio Hospital in Rome in 1976 due to worsening health conditions, Kappler escaped in 1977 and fled to Germany, where he died in 1978...
But this story is not the subject of the History Channel documentary, which instead focuses specifically on the capture of Erich Priebke and how it happened almost by chance.
Indeed, it was April 1994 when ABC News reporter Sam Donaldson traveled to the town of Bariloche in the province of Rio Negro, Argentina.
Bariloche is a small town located at the base of the Andes and began to be populated by immigrants from Austria, Italy, Slovenia, and especially Germany since the late 1800s. Notably, during the post-war years, the town became known as a primary destination for Nazis who had escaped capture. In a 2004 book, Argentine author Abel Basti even suggests that Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun lived there, although this theory has never been conclusively proven and for what we know, is more of a suggestion than anything else.
The hunt for Priebke began entirely by chance.
Donaldson initially went to Bariloche to locate another war criminal, Nazi officer Reinhard Kopps. With the help of Jewish Argentine researcher Dalila Herbst and a general atmosphere of hostility from the Bariloche population, which Donaldson described as a sort of 'little Bavaria at the foot of the Andes,' attention soon shifted to Erich Priebke, thanks to archival materials and a book, 'El pintor de la Suiza argentina' by Esteban Buch, which mentioned the SS captain as part of the Nazi community living in Bariloche since the early fifties. Later, prompted by Dalila Herbst's questions, it was Reinhard Kopps himself who confirmed his identity.
Under pressure from Sam Donaldson and the team from the American broadcaster ABC's 'Prime Time Live', Erich Priebke admitted his identity and responsibility for the massacre, describing it as a tragedy, confirming his direct authorship of the execution of two victims, and emphasizing that, in any case, he had simply obeyed orders.
The rest of the story falls under Italian judicial chronicles.
Indeed, in November 1995, Priebke arrived in Italy, where he was imprisoned in the military prison of Forte Boccea in Rome.
The trial obviously became a media event, which those who are slightly older might certainly remember: The military tribunal, although recognizing the responsibility of the accused, deemed that he should not have to defend himself because too much time had passed since the crime, and ordered his release. A protest, however, virtually besieged the tribunal's headquarters until Minister Giovanni Maria Flick annulled the sentences and imposed the conviction.
The matter is quite complex, and its detailed reconstruction would require too much space, which we clearly cannot afford in this specific frame. Nevertheless, the case dragged on for another two years until November 1998, when Priebke was finally sentenced to life imprisonment, but a few months later, due to his advanced age, he was allowed to serve his sentence under house arrest.
However, the controversies did not cease, and over the years 'eminent' representatives from the political and intellectual world, let's say, wanted to express direct solidarity with Erich Priebke, considering the measure unjust or at least unjustified in light of the presented facts. This continued until his death on October 11, 2013.
A few months earlier, on the occasion of his hundredth birthday, there were no lack of expressions of solidarity and extreme fanaticism towards him: Priebke was described as a true 'hero' and victim of the judicial system.
All this happened practically only four years ago (practically yesterday) and towards someone who was undoubtedly a war criminal regardless of any kind of judgement and still condemned as such.
Beyond the story of his capture, told in a descriptive and detailed manner in this episode of 'Nazi Hunters', which addresses the issue fairly succinctly considering Priebke a war criminal and nothing more, without rhetoric or ever questioning this aspect, there still exist justified perplexities for the viewer regarding the cultural manifestations related to those events that happened so many years ago and still resurface today. Forms of thinking I would define as irksome, which are part of history as much as current events, if we think about what is happening and starting from Monday when in a curve (section) of the Stadio Olimpico in Rome, stickers were found depicting Anne Frank wearing a Roma jersey and apparently distributed by some Lazio fans.
Apart from the bad taste and 'provocation' of the gesture, which nevertheless recalls a certain theme regarding what happens in our stadiums, that always and anyhow seem to be a kind of 'free port' where anything can occur without any legal consequence, as well as the true 'nature' of some supposed groups of fans, I found some of the reactions equally improbable and inappropriate, such as that of the daily newspaper 'La Repubblica' and other newspapers that proposed the same picture but with Anne Frank wearing this time not one but multiple jerseys of teams from our championship, creating a sort of composition in the style of Andy Warhol's pop art.
I did not feel offended or scandalized, I simply wonder as a private citizen what is the right approach to such a evidently delicate issue, which concerns not only discrimination but also what we can define as 'historical memory'.
The identification of those responsible and the 'firm condemnation' by the federal authorities, the DASPO, seem to me an act at the very least due. However, they are interventions that have a relative usefulness and function.
At the same time, without resorting to easy or moralistic considerations (but how can one not be moralistic when we talk about the Holocaust...) I've always thought that some things like the commemorations for the massacre of the Ardeatine Caves or the day of memory, were somewhat useless or easily sentimental. However, in light of certain facts and still of what is a generally prevalent racist behavior (not only towards Jews), I cannot but realize, practically raising my hands and surrendering to the evidence of facts, that certain things have to be communicated anyway, even in situations that may seem full of rhetoric such as the institution of commemorative days or the distribution of 'The Diary' and 'If This Is a Man' during a soccer match.
Was Priebke's conviction something legally 'exact' or not? On this aspect, I leave the door open to different considerations and also for those who possess the competence, rightly technical and which might lead to reflections and considerations on our legal system in general. But this conviction was, at the same time, something still relevant and 'right' on a historical and moral level. In my opinion, the answer is yes, and just as historical facts are recounted for what they were, I believe that in the annals, this conviction should also be considered an exemplary event beyond the overcoming of what could have been technical and political obstacles that might have prevented it.
The rest concerns critical sense and this can only be given to you by education and scholastic and family formation. Documentary operations like this brief yet complete reconstruction by P.J. Naworynski, which tells stories that appear distant in time but as we have seen are more current than we might imagine, are a historical contribution only seemingly neutral because they start from a premise, the condemnation of Nazism, which should be a universally shared heritage and which instead wavers not only in our country, but as recent news events have told us, also in the United States and the rest of the world.
Loading comments slowly
