Talk:Befehlsnotstand

Self-Contradiction

Article header: Research into the subject since has proven that Befehlsnotstand as such did exist, meaning German soldiers did actually face drastic consequences if refusing orders during the war....

Nazi Germany section: With the formation of the Central Office of the State Justice Administrations for the Investigation of National Socialist Crimes this changed as a historical research by the organisation revealed that no known case could be established where refusing an unlawful order did result in severe punishment.

Which of these is correct? Susan Davis (talk) 19:16, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi Susan, I imagine whoever wrote the latter part first, mixed up soldiers with Sicherheitsdienst-police enforcers. To be sure, I looked everywhere I could, in both German and English sites and archives for proof of that statement regarding 'Central Office of the State Justice Administrations for the Investigation of National Socialist Crimes', and could not find any. The referencing article written by historian Sven Kellerhoff only speaks about Sicherheitsdienst-Einsatzgruppen members, which were the executioner squads sent in after the army to round up the 'undesirables' and execute them. If one does not differentiate the different units and organizations they belong to, it gets confusing very quickly. Both Norbert Haase in 'Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS Court Martials', and H.E. Volkmann in 'The Wehrmacht: Mythos and Reality' Oldenburg, Munich 1999, ISBN 3-486-56383-1, who researched the topic extensively, found that, as stated in the article, 1.5 million combat soldiers from Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS were court martialed for, among others, disobeying direct orders, and 23,000 of those were executed. In the field a soldier stealing simple things as bread from a comrade, was often shot. All to enforce and strengthen discipline. I hope this helps. --Nanorsuaq (talk) 05:12, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

@Susan Davis and Nanorsuaq: The contradiction in the article results from this edit, it wasn't there before. I think there is some confusion here between German soldiers being punished for refusing to follow a legal order and refusing an illegal order. Stealing bread from a comrade is a crime in most armed forces I would guess, as is desertion. These don't constitute Befehlsnotstand however. Befehlsnotstand is when a soldier refuses to follow an illegal order. The murdering of unarmed civilians by Einstazgruppen and Wehrmacht was certainly illegal by international law and, also my understand of law is limited, I would say it was even illegal in Nazi Germany. Have a read of this Deutsche Welle article (in German) on the subject. Nanorsuaq, does your source break down how many of the above mentioned 23,000 executed were killed for refusing to obey a legal order versus refusing to obey an illegal order? Because that is the key point about Befehlsnotstand. Turismond (talk) 02:30, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@Susan Davis and Turismond: This is an interesting discussion and I appreciate it very much, for some nuances will be made more clear because of it. First, I think the term Befehlsnotstand is translated wrong in the article. I would translate it as: 'The compulsion to obey an order'. Befehl means Order and Notstand means a State of Emergency. The definition of state of emergency is: State of emergency in the constitutional sense is a dangerous situation that needs to be rectified by swift action. Second, the terms illegal and legal need to be applied more carefully here. From hindsight and a higher moral standpoint and cross cultural, it is of course much easier. At the time, for a combatant to refuse an order to shoot was termed 'Feigheit vor dem Feind/Cowardice in the Face of the Enemy'. It wouldn't go on records as legal or illegal. In the law of Nazi Germany the people executed were enemies of the state so there was no conflict. When individual soldiers had moral issues regarding shooting unarmed enemies, they still feared for their lives if they didn't. And they didn't really have much time to think about it either. That's the context of the term Befehlsnotstand. Why I mentioned the bread stealing was because people were shot for it, let alone for cowardice in the face of the enemy. Yes, other armed forces find bread stealing 'illegal' too, but they don't shoot their soldiers for it. At least in the western world to my knowledge. The discipline in the German army of the time (and Waffen-SS even more) was enforced with draconic measures. On top of it, imagine an approximately 18 to 26 year old American soldier in Afghanistan or Iraq, being ordered to shoot an 8 year old boy in an instant for using a cell phone when the usage of cell phones was strictly forbidden within 100 meters of American or Coalition personell or vehicles because they were used as triggering devices for IEDs. An the Taliban didn't shirk back from using children to trigger IEDs. I witnessed that myself many times. The soldier doesn't have time to think if is this illegal or legal by standards of international law, he only knows the law of the land executed by his superiors and the pressure is extremely high, because, aside from the action itself, if he doesn't act, or too late, he himself and his teammates might be blown to bits in an instant. So, the context not only matters but is crucial. And the same applies to German combat soldiers in the WW II theater. For them was the added pressure of ending up in front of a firing squad for refusing to obey an order. Today we know that the whole Iraq war was for nothing, there was no nuclear program that the Bush administration used as a reason to invade at the time. Now we also know that that administration knew that and still invaded. Now, is every American and coalition soldier that killed someone in Iraq during that time criminal? No one even mentions the criminal act of invading Iraq, or even calls it criminal. At the time we did what we were ordered to do. And what was necessary to keep the men next to you safe. Third, there is not enough distinction of the nuances in this article regarding the different units and sub-organizations of the German armed forces and policing units, extermination units and concentration camp personell. Which unit and/organization had what task and what purpose. Some were cross used but that was rare in by comparison. Simply because it goes against the orderliness and the authority consciousness of the German cultural mindset. To mingle Einsatzgruppen Death Squads with combat soldiers of Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS, and throw them all in the same pot as German soldiers creates a never ending confusion of issues. I find the more nuances, the better the public can learn. I looked at the right winger marches in Charlottesville last year and was stupefied by how Nazi symbolism was used by these fanatics and even more by how they know nothing of the symbols or the according historical context of the symbols they are using. That level of ignorance is astonishing to me. Turismond, to answer your question, over 10,000 men were executed for cowardice in the face of the enemy, the ones you questioned about would fall into that category. I have no knowledge of how many for that particular reason. There are know cases like the one about Anton Schmid, but he particularly hid Jewish people to prevent them from being rounded up. He did it because he was a devout catholic. Not the same. --Nanorsuaq (talk) 18:15, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Begging the question

This presumes that there were indeed orders to commit war crimes existed. Which is what would have to be proven in the first place. The article simply assumes this. --105.12.0.1 (talk) 16:58, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Proof needed

There are many things mixed up here. For example it's a huge difference if a high ranked Nazi is considered too soft for leading a KZ so he is transfered and a Wehrmacht soldier refusing a direct order on the front line. Also to state, based on one source, that no Wehrmacht soldier was executed because he denied an unlawful order but thousands were executed denying lawful orders is missing any logic. Of course the Nazis did not wrote the real order that was denied as the reason for the exexution! This article seems more myth than plausible facts about the reality of a German front soldier. A much deeper and differentiated view seems necessary here. 91.53.90.212 (talk) 00:31, 13 March 2023 (UTC)