3. World War Two

Contents

1. The Nazi vision of a New European Order
2. Genocide as a pillar of the New European Order
3. Case study: France under Nazi occupation (1940–44)

Key issues

Assess the aims of the New European Order (WWII).

Key terms

New European Order (WWII)
Lebensraum

Discussion points

Churchill and de Gaulle during World War Two
Operation Barbarossa (1941) and the war of extermination in the East
A Nazi Death Camp

The concept of the New European Order, in Nazi ideology during World War II, represented a plan to reorganise Europe under German hegemony. This vision was not merely a political restructuring but a radical re-imagining of the continent based on racial hierarchy, territorial conquest, and economic domination. The Nazis claimed that their New European Order would bring stability and progress, but in reality, it aimed to entrench German dominance by exploiting the resources and populations of occupied territories while eliminating those deemed racially or ideologically unfit.

Lebensraum, rooted in the expansionist ideology articulated in Hitler’s Mein Kampf, sought to justify the submission of Eastern Europe as necessary for the survival and prosperity of the German people. This policy targeted Slavic populations for displacement or extermination to make room for German settlers, highlighting the brutal racial and imperialist dimensions of Nazi ideology.

The economic framework of Grossraum, or “Greater Germany,” which envisioned a unified European economic unit dominated by Germany. This concept aimed to integrate the economies of occupied countries into a single unit that served German interests. Resources, industrial output, and labour were systematically extracted from conquered territories to fuel the German war machine, at the expense of the well-being and survival of local populations.

Together, the New European Order, Lebensraum, and Grossraum, and a crusade against communism reveal the Nazis’ attempt to impose a hierarchical and exploitative structure on Europe, rooted in racial ideology and sustained through violence and economic plunder. These terms encapsulate the grand but ultimately destructive ambitions that defined the Nazi regime’s vision for the continent.

#1. The Nazi vision of a New European Order

#A. Ideological foundations of the New European Order

#a) The concept of Europe as a racial entity

The Nazi vision of a “New European Order” was built on the idea of Europe as a racial hierarchy dominated by the so-called Aryan race. Pseudo-scientific theories of racial superiority positioned Germans at the apex of civilisation, casting them as cultural creators destined to dominate “lesser” races. This ideology, central to Hitler's Mein Kampf, justified the systematic subjugation or extermination of groups deemed inferior.

At the top of this racial hierarchy were Aryans as the “master race,” followed by Western Europeans, considered racially acceptable but subordinate. Slavs were seen as inferior and useful only for forced labour, while Jews and Roma were vilified as existential threats (gegenrasse, or “anti-race”) and targeted for extermination. Other groups, including Black people and people with disabilities, were also persecuted as incompatible with the Aryan ideal. The Generalplan Ost outlined plans to displace or kill tens of millions of Slavs to make way for German settlers. Meanwhile, Jews were systematically dehumanised in Nazi propaganda, linked to communism and capitalism, and made the focus of genocidal policies culminating in the Holocaust.

#b) Lebensraum and the quest for Eastern expansion

The concept of Lebensraum (living space) was a cornerstone of Nazi ideology, driving their territorial and genocidal ambitions. Adolf Hitler presented it as a racial imperative in Mein Kampf, envisioning the conquest of fertile Eastern European territories, particularly in Poland, Ukraine, and the Soviet Union, to secure the prosperity of the Aryan race. Eastern Europe was seen as a resource-rich frontier to be colonised by German settlers, while the existing populations were to be displaced, enslaved, or exterminated.

During Operation Barbarossa in 1941, these plans materialised with mass shootings, deliberate starvation policies, and the destruction of entire communities. Cities and towns in Eastern Europe were re-purposed for German settlers, while Slavic populations were reduced to a permanent underclass. The campaign was not only territorial but also ideological, representing a war against communism and Jewish influence, and leaving a legacy of mass destruction and displacement.

#c) The crusade against communism

Nazism framed its ideology as a crusade against communism, which it viewed as a Jewish creation and a mortal threat to Aryan civilisation. Adolf Hitler tied antisemitism to anti-Bolshevism, coining the term “Judeo-Bolshevism” to justify war against the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was seen both as the epicentre of communist ideology and as territory ripe for conquest as part of Lebensraum.

The invasion of the Soviet Union began with Operation Barbarossa in June 1941, a campaign that was both a military offensive and an ideological war. Nazi propaganda depicted it as a struggle of the German “master race” against the “Judeo-Bolshevik menace,” rallying domestic support and attracting collaborators across Europe. On the ground, atrocities were rampant: the Einsatzgruppen, while the infamous Commissar Order mandated the killing of Soviet political officers. The crusade against communism brought unparalleled destruction to the Eastern Front, with over 20 million Soviet civilian and military deaths during the war.

#d) Economic strategies: Grossraum and exploitation

The Nazi economic vision centred on Grossraum (greater economic space), integrating occupied territories into a single economic unit under German control. This strategy aimed to extract resources, labour, and wealth from subjugated nations to sustain Germany’s war effort and long-term hegemony.

Eastern Europe was transformed into a resource colony, with its population subjected to forced labour. By 1944, 7.6 million foreign workers, primarily from Eastern Europe, were conscripted to work in German industries under brutal conditions. In Poland, food rations were deliberately reduced to 700–800 calories per day, resulting in widespread famine. Western European economies were also subordinated to Germany. France, for instance, was forced to pay 20 billion Reichsmarks in occupation costs by 1944, and its industries, like Renault, were commandeered to produce military equipment. Nazi administrators looted £1 billion in gold, including $223 million from Belgium and $150 million from the Netherlands.

While Grossraum temporarily bolstered Germany’s war effort, its exploitative nature caused economic hardship and bred resistance across Europe. The focus on short-term extraction undermined long-term stability, contributing to the collapse of the Nazi vision for a New European Order.

#B. The territorial extent and governance of the Reich

#a) Administrative divisions of Nazi-occupied Europe

The Nazis organised their control over occupied Europe through a complex system of administrative divisions, tailored to the racial, political, and economic priorities of the regime. These divisions ranged from direct incorporation into the Reich to indirect governance through puppet states and harsh military occupation in resource-rich or “racially inferior” areas. This structure enabled the Nazis to enforce their ideology, exploit resources, and maintain control over vast territories.

Directly annexed territories (e.g., Alsace-Lorraine, Austria) Certain regions deemed integral to the German Reich were directly annexed and subjected to full Germanisation. Austria, annexed in 1938 following the Anschluss, was absorbed into the Reich as Ostmark, its administration fully integrated into the Nazi system. In Alsace-Lorraine, annexed after France’s defeat in 1940, the Nazis sought to erase local identities by banning the French language, conscripting Alsatians into the German military, and imposing strict German cultural norms. Similarly, western Poland, including the Warthegau, underwent brutal Germanisation, with millions of Poles and Jews forcibly displaced to make room for German settlers. These territories were governed by Reich-appointed officials who prioritised cultural erasure, economic exploitation, and racial “cleansing.”
Puppet states and collaborators (e.g., Vichy France, Slovakia) In regions where direct annexation was impractical, the Nazis established puppet governments that collaborated with German policies. Vichy France, established in 1940, nominally controlled southern France but closely cooperated with Germany, notably in deporting Jews and suppressing resistance movements. Slovakia, under Jozef Tiso’s regime, became a Nazi satellite state, adopting pro-German policies and participating in the deportation of Slovak Jews. These puppet regimes enabled the Nazis to extend their influence without overburdening their administrative resources. By exploiting local collaborators, they maintained a semblance of legitimacy while advancing their goals of racial purification, economic control, and political repression.
Military-occupied zones (e.g., Poland, the Netherlands) Other regions were subjected to direct military occupation, especially where populations were deemed racially or ideologically problematic. Poland, divided between Germany and the Soviet Union in 1939, was the most significant example. The General Government, established in central Poland, became a hub of forced labour, resource extraction, and genocide, including the establishment of death camps such as Auschwitz and Treblinka. The Netherlands, though not annexed, experienced strict military rule, with its industries and agriculture redirected to support the German war effort. In these zones, civilian life was marked by severe repression, including mass arrests, executions, and systematic plundering of resources. Resistance movements faced brutal crackdowns, while the Nazi administration prioritised labour exploitation and resource extraction to fuel the German war machine.

#b) Governance structures: SS, civilian administrations, and local collaborations

The governance of Nazi-occupied Europe relied on a combination of SS authority, civilian administrations, and local collaborators, each serving distinct roles in implementing Nazi policies. This multilayered system ensured the regime could maintain control, enforce ideology, and exploit resources efficiently, even across vast and diverse territories.

The Schutzstaffel (SS), led by Heinrich Himmler, was central to governance in occupied territories, particularly in enforcing racial policies and overseeing security. A key organisation under the SS was the Reichssicherheitshauptamt (RSHA), or Reich Security Main Office, which coordinated intelligence, surveillance, and repression across occupied Europe. The RSHA oversaw the Gestapo (secret police), the Kripo (criminal police), and the SD (Security Service), playing a vital role in identifying and eliminating political opponents, partisans, and Jews. The Einsatzgruppen, mobile killing units responsible for mass executions in Eastern Europe, operated under RSHA directives. In areas like Poland, the SS directly administered concentration and extermination camps, ensuring the implementation of the “Final Solution”, after the Wannsee Conference in 1942.

Civilian administrations were established to manage the day-to-day governance of occupied territories. These administrations, often staffed by German officials, focused on economic exploitation, infrastructure control, and enforcing German laws. In Western Europe, such as in the Netherlands and Belgium, the civilian administration allowed for a degree of local autonomy under German oversight, making governance more palatable to the local population. However, in Eastern Europe, civilian administrators worked closely with the SS to exploit resources and suppress local resistance. The Reichskommissariat Ukraine, for instance, oversaw the extraction of food and raw materials, leading to mass starvation and economic devastation.

The Nazis relied heavily on local collaborators to administer occupied regions, enforce policies, and suppress dissent. Collaboration took various forms, from ideological alignment to opportunistic support. In Slovakia and Hungary, local governments aligned themselves with Nazi policies, enacting anti-Jewish laws and deporting Jews to concentration camps. In countries like France, local police and bureaucrats played key roles in identifying and deporting Jews during the Holocaust. In Eastern Europe and in the Baltic territories, some nationalist groups, such as the Lithuanian Auxiliary Police, actively participated in atrocities against Jews and communists.

This governance structure allowed the Nazis to extend their reach while minimising the administrative burden on the Reich. However, it also exposed divisions and inefficiencies, particularly in regions where resistance movements challenged both German authority and local collaborators. Despite these challenges, the system facilitated the widespread implementation of Nazi ideology, particularly the racial policies that defined the New European Order.

#C. Propaganda and the enforcement of Nazi ideology

#a) Mechanisms of control and repression

The Nazis relied heavily on mechanisms of repression to enforce their ideology and maintain control over Germany and occupied territories. Central to this effort were the Gestapo (secret police) and the SS, which were tasked with identifying and eliminating opposition. The Gestapo operated a vast network of informants, arresting individuals suspected of anti-regime activities or dissent. Many were sent to concentration camps without trial, while others faced execution. The SS, particularly its mobile killing units, the Einsatzgruppen, carried out mass executions in occupied territories.

Repression was particularly severe in the occupied territories, where acts of resistance were met with brutal retaliation. The destruction of Lidice in Czechoslovakia in 1942 remains one of the most notorious examples. Following the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich, Nazi forces executed all 173 men in the village, deported women to concentration camps, and either sent children to extermination camps or forcibly Germanised them. The village was completely destroyed, with its buildings razed, and its name removed from maps. Such actions were intended to serve as warnings to deter further resistance.

Surveillance and suppression extended into all areas of life in occupied Europe. The Nazis co-opted local administrations to enforce their policies, often recruiting collaborators to assist in identifying dissidents and carrying out arrests. Entire communities could be punished for individual acts of resistance, with mass shootings or deportations used as collective reprisals. These measures created an atmosphere of constant fear, ensuring that opposition to Nazi rule was rare and difficult to sustain.

This extensive system of repression allowed the Nazis to maintain control over vast territories, suppress resistance, and enforce their ideology through fear and brutality.

#b) Use of propaganda to consolidate the Nazi vision

Propaganda was a central tool in the Nazi effort to consolidate their vision of a racially and ideologically unified society. Under the direction of Joseph Goebbels, the Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda controlled all aspects of media, culture, and information. Newspapers, radio broadcasts, films, and public speeches were tightly regulated to ensure that only messages promoting Nazi ideology were disseminated. Themes of Aryan racial superiority, loyalty to Adolf Hitler, and the demonisation of enemies such as Jews, communists, and liberal democracies dominated public discourse.

Films were particularly effective in shaping public perception. Productions like Triumph of the Will (1935) glorified Nazi power and unity, while newsreels depicted Hitler as a charismatic leader destined to restore Germany’s greatness. Posters, slogans, and public rallies reinforced these messages, creating an environment where Nazi ideals seemed inescapable. Propaganda also extended into the occupied territories, where it was used to legitimise German rule, discourage resistance, and emphasise the supposed benefits of collaboration with the Reich.

The Nazis also harnessed the education system to instil their ideology in the next generation. School curricula were restructured to focus on racial science, militarism, and loyalty to the Führer. History lessons glorified Germany’s past, particularly the militaristic traditions of Prussia, while biology classes taught the supposed superiority of the Aryan race and the dangers of racial mixing. Jewish students and teachers were systematically excluded, further embedding antisemitic principles into the education system.

Youth organisations, such as the Hitler Youth and the League of German Girls, were critical in extending this indoctrination beyond the classroom. These groups provided physical training, military-style discipline, and ideological instruction, shaping young people into loyal supporters of the regime. By targeting children and adolescents, the Nazis sought to secure long-term adherence to their vision, ensuring that Nazi ideals would persist into future generations.

Through the use of propaganda and education, the Nazis were able to manipulate public perception, enforce ideological conformity, and foster unwavering loyalty to the regime. This systemic indoctrination played a vital role in maintaining control over both Germany and occupied Europe.

#D. Order or disorder: an evaluation of Nazi-occupied Europe

#a) The dual nature of the New European Order: efficiency vs chaos

Nazi-occupied Europe exhibited a stark duality between the regime’s ambitious vision of an orderly and unified New European Order and the reality of widespread chaos and inefficiency. On one hand, the Nazis sought to impose a rigid hierarchy and efficient administration across their vast empire, aligning conquered territories with their ideological and economic goals. This ambition was evident in the systematic exploitation of resources, the coordination of forced labour, and the establishment of puppet governments to maintain control.

However, the Nazi regime’s governance was riddled with inefficiencies and contradictions. Rivalries between key institutions such as the SS, the Wehrmacht, and civilian administrators undermined effective coordination. Competing bureaucracies often pursued overlapping or conflicting objectives, driven by personal ambition and ideological fervour rather than cohesive strategy. In occupied territories, this lack of coordination led to inconsistent policies and erratic governance. For example, in some regions, local populations were treated with relative leniency to encourage collaboration, while in others, they faced brutal repression, sowing confusion and resentment.

Eastern Europe, in particular, epitomised the chaos of Nazi rule. The region became a theatre of extreme violence and exploitation, with millions of civilians subjected to forced labour, mass executions, and starvation. While these policies aimed to establish German dominance, the brutality and disorganisation often undermined the regime’s long-term goals. Resistance movements flourished in response to Nazi oppression, further destabilising the occupied territories.

This duality reflected the inherent contradictions within the Nazi system. While the regime aspired to create a racially and economically unified Europe under German hegemony, its reliance on violence, ideological dogma, and competing power structures created an environment of disorder and instability. This tension between efficiency and chaos ultimately limited the Nazis' ability to achieve their vision of a New European Order.

#b) Contrasting regional experiences across occupied Europe

Nazi rule varied widely across Europe, reflecting the regime’s racial ideology and strategic priorities. In Western Europe, such as France and the Netherlands, the Nazis relied on civilian administrations and local collaborators to enforce policies, focusing on economic exploitation and maintaining stability. While resistance movements grew over time, repression in these areas was less brutal compared to the East.

In Eastern Europe, particularly in Poland and the Soviet Union, the occupation was marked by extreme violence, forced labour, and genocide. These regions were central to the Nazis' Lebensraum ambitions, resulting in mass killings, resource extraction, and widespread destruction. Resistance was fierce, but Nazi retaliation, such as the destruction of villages, was devastating.

Scandinavia experienced a mix of cooperation and repression, with Denmark maintaining limited autonomy while Norway endured harsher military rule. These regional variations highlight the inconsistent and often chaotic implementation of Nazi governance across occupied Europe.

#c) Opposition to Nazi rule in Germany

Opposition to Nazi rule within Germany was fragmented and constrained by pervasive repression. Political resistance came from underground networks of communists, socialists, and trade unionists, who distributed anti-Nazi pamphlets and organised clandestine activities despite constant surveillance by the Gestapo. Religious opposition was led by figures such as Dietrich Bonhoeffer and the Confessing Church, as well as Catholic leaders who protested actions like the T4 euthanasia programme.

Intellectuals and conservatives, including the Kreisau Circle, envisioned a post-Nazi Germany based on democratic and ethical principles. Although they avoided direct sabotage, their plans for a just Germany after Hitler’s fall influenced other resistance efforts. Youth groups like the White Rose (led by Sophie Scholl and her brother) distributed anti-regime leaflets, while the Edelweiss Pirates engaged in acts of defiance, such as sabotaging infrastructure and aiding deserters.

Military resistance culminated in the 20 July 1944 assassination attempt on Hitler, led by Claus von Stauffenberg and other Wehrmacht officers disillusioned by his catastrophic war strategy and extremist policies. While these efforts demonstrated internal dissent, Nazi surveillance and severe reprisals limited their impact, ensuring that opposition remained largely symbolic. Nonetheless, these acts of resistance highlight that not all Germans were complicit in the regime's crimes.

#d) Assessing the priorities of Nazi-occupied Europe

The Nazi occupation of Europe was driven by three key objectives: racial purification, economic domination, and the fight against communism. These goals were deeply intertwined, often reinforcing each other, though their emphasis varied by region and context. While racial ideology was the unifying framework, economic priorities and anti-communist strategies were both critical tools in implementing this vision.

Racial obsession underpinned almost every Nazi policy. It dictated the structure of the New European Order, with policies like the Generalplan Ost reflecting the priority of racial purification. For example, in Poland and the Soviet Union, racial ideology led to the mass extermination of Jews and Slavs, often at the expense of economic efficiency. Labour that could have been exploited for the war effort was instead destroyed in concentration camps, such as Auschwitz, which served dual purposes: economic exploitation through forced labour and the extermination of racial enemies. This illustrates how racial goals often took precedence over practical economic considerations.

Economic exploitation, however, was critical to the Nazi war machine, particularly in resource-rich areas like France and Ukraine. The Grossraum concept envisioned Europe as a unified economic zone dominated by Germany, with occupied territories providing labour, raw materials, and industrial output. France's industries supported German military production. In contrast, Eastern Europe was subjected to more destructive policies, as racial ideology overshadowed long-term economic planning. The deliberate starvation of Ukrainian civilians during the extraction of agricultural resources demonstrates how racial priorities could undermine economic goals.

The crusade against communism, though partly ideological, was also inseparable from racial and territorial ambitions. Hitler equated communism with Jewish influence, framing the Soviet Union as both a racial and ideological enemy. Operation Barbarossa exemplifies this convergence, as it aimed to annihilate communist ideology, seize Lebensraum for German settlers, and eliminate Jews and Slavs. The Einsatzgruppen, mobile killing units operating in the Soviet Union, conducted mass executions that targeted political commissars and Jewish civilians simultaneously, as they wrote in their reports, reflecting the intertwined nature of these goals.

While racial ideology was the overarching framework, its implementation was often facilitated by economic exploitation and anti-communist actions. In practice, the priorities shifted based on regional circumstances: economic extraction dominated in Western Europe, while racial cleansing and anti-communist fervour shaped the brutal policies in the East. These objectives were not separate but mutually reinforcing, with racial ideology serving as the foundation upon which the Nazi vision of a New European Order was built.

#2. Genocide as a pillar of the New European Order

#A. The pursuit of racial purification

#a) Discrimination (1933–1939)

The Nazi regime's campaign of racial purification began with policies of discrimination aimed at excluding Jews and other groups deemed racially inferior from German society. The Nuremberg Laws of 1935 were pivotal, stripping Jews of citizenship, banning intermarriage with Aryans, and enforcing racial segregation. Jews were systematically excluded from professions, education, and public spaces, while propaganda dehumanised them, portraying them as existential threats to the German people.

Events like Kristallnacht in November 1938 marked a violent shift from legal discrimination to outright persecution. It was much more than what we call "The Night of the Broken Glass", so we should always be careful in handling nazi language. During this coordinated pogrom, Jewish businesses, synagogues, and homes were attacked, and approximately 30,000 Jewish men were arrested and sent to concentration camps. This phase entrenched antisemitism in German society and laid the foundation for the more radical policies that followed.

As Nazi control expanded across Europe, discriminatory practices were extended to occupied territories. In Poland, Jews were required to wear white armbands bearing a blue Star of David to identify them publicly, while in France, the German authorities introduced mandatory yellow stars in 1942. These measures not only facilitated the segregation and identification of Jewish populations but also intensified their social isolation and vulnerability to persecution.

#b) Ghettoisation (1939–1941)

The Nazi occupation of Poland and other parts of Eastern Europe escalated racial policies into a phase of ghettoisation. Jews were forcibly relocated into sealed-off urban areas, such as the Warsaw and Lodz ghettos, where overcrowding, starvation, and disease caused widespread death. Ghettos served as tools to isolate Jews from the general population and concentrate them for eventual deportation.

During this period, the Nazis also intensified forced labour policies, exploiting Jewish populations under brutal conditions to support the German war effort. Ghettoisation reflected the regime’s progression toward the "Final Solution," functioning as an intermediate step between segregation and mass extermination.

#c) Concentration and extermination (1941–1945)

The invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 marked the start of the Nazis' final phase of racial purification: systematic concentration and extermination. During Operation Barbarossa, the Nazis unleashed the Einsatzgruppen, mobile killing units responsible for mass shootings of Jews, Roma, and Soviet political commissars. Mass graves, such as those at Babi Yar, in Ukrainereflected the scale of these atrocities.

This phase culminated in the industrialised genocide of the "Final Solution," formalised at the Wannsee Conference in January 1942. Jews were deported en masse from ghettos to extermination camps such as Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Sobibor. These camps combined forced labour with systematic killing, using gas chambers to murder millions. By 1945, approximately 6 million Jews and millions of other victims, including Roma, Poles, and Soviet prisoners of war, had been exterminated.

#B. The Einsatzgruppen: mobile killing squads in Eastern Europe

#a) Operations in newly conquered territories

The Einsatzgruppen were mobile killing units deployed by the Nazi regime to carry out mass executions in newly conquered territories, particularly in Poland and the Soviet Union. Operating under the Reich Security Main Office (RSHA), they were divided into four main units (Einsatzgruppen A, B, C, and D), each assigned to a specific region behind advancing German forces. Together, these units comprised around 3,000 men, including SS personnel, Gestapo, and Order Police (Ordnungspolizei or OrdPo), as well as local collaborators.

Tasked with eliminating Jews, Roma, political opponents, and other groups considered threats, the Einsatzgruppen primarily relied on mass shootings, often referred to by modern historians as the "Holocaust by bullets." This term highlights the widespread use of firearms to conduct genocidal operations before the industrialisation of killing in extermination camps. Historians estimate that by the end of 1942, the Einsatzgruppen had killed between 1.3 and 1.5 million people, with over 2 million deaths attributed to them by the end of the war. Their operations marked a shift from ghettoisation and forced labour to outright genocide, forming a precursor to the extermination camps.

Early in their operations, the Einsatzgruppen experimented with alternative methods of execution to address logistical and psychological challenges. For example, in Kaunas (Kovno), Lithuania, Jews were initially killed with hammer blows to the head before mass shootings became standard. While such methods proved inefficient, they reveal the improvisational and evolving nature of Nazi killing operations in the early stages of genocide.

Alcohol played a significant role in the daily operations of the Einsatzgruppen. Executions were often carried out in gruelling shifts, leaving many perpetrators traumatised or reluctant to continue. To maintain morale, commanders provided alcohol as a reward and coping mechanism. This practice created a brutal cycle of desensitisation, where drinking numbed the psychological toll of mass killings and further incentivised participation.

As the war turned against Germany, the Nazis sought to conceal evidence of Einsatzgruppen atrocities through Operation 1005. Mass graves were exhumed, bodies were burned on pyres, and bones were ground to ash using machinery. Jewish prisoners were forced to perform these tasks under appalling conditions, only to be executed afterward to eliminate witnesses. Despite these efforts, sites like Babi Yar and Liepaja remained documented by survivors, Nazi reports, and Allied investigations.

#b) Babi Yar

The Babi Yar massacre, near Kyiv, Ukraine, stands as one of the most notorious atrocities committed by the Einsatzgruppen. On 29–30 September 1941, under the command of Einsatzgruppe C, more than 33,000 Jews were rounded up under the pretext of resettlement. They were marched to the Babi Yar ravine, stripped of their clothing, and shot in waves, their bodies falling into the ravine in layers.

In the following months, additional executions at Babi Yar targeted Roma, Soviet prisoners of war, and resistance fighters, bringing the total death toll at the site to over 100,000. Although the Nazis attempted to erase evidence of the massacre during Operation 1005, survivor testimonies and later investigations revealed the full scale of the atrocity. Babi Yar has since become a powerful symbol of the Holocaust and the Einsatzgruppen's role in Nazi genocide.

#c) Liepaja massacre

The Liepaja massacre, carried out in the Latvian port city, was another major atrocity committed by the Einsatzgruppen. Over several months in 1941, Einsatzgruppe A, aided by Latvian collaborators, systematically executed the city’s Jewish population. The most intense killings occurred between 15–17 December 1941, when approximately 2,700 Jews were marched to the beaches near Liepaja, forced to strip naked, and shot in groups. Their bodies were buried in mass graves along the coastline.

By the end of 1941, over 5,000 Jews from Liepaja had been murdered, contributing to the larger campaign of annihilation in the Baltic region. SS reports proudly declared the region of Kurland in southern Latvia as "Judenfrei," meaning that all Jews had been exterminated. Although the Nazis attempted to destroy evidence of the killings, survivor testimonies and historical research have preserved the memory of this atrocity.

#C. A study of Nazi death camps

#a) The role of death camps in the 'Final Solution'

Death camps, or extermination centres, played a pivotal role in the implementation of the Nazi “Final Solution,” the systematic extermination of the Jewish population. Unlike concentration camps, which were primarily designed for forced labour, detention, and punishment, extermination centres were constructed with the sole purpose of mass killing. Six major extermination camps—Auschwitz-Birkenau, Treblinka, Sobibor, Belzec, Chelmno, and Majdanek—were established in occupied Poland to facilitate this genocide.

The Nazis refined the logistics of mass murder in these facilities. Victims were transported by train, often under the guise of “resettlement,” to camps where they were quickly sorted. Those deemed unfit for labour, primarily women, children, the elderly, and the infirm, were sent directly to gas chambers. Carbon monoxide from engine exhaust or Zyklon B, a cyanide-based pesticide, was used to kill victims in sealed chambers. This industrialised method of killing distinguished extermination centres from other forms of mass murder, such as the shootings conducted by the Einsatzgruppen.

#b) Auschwitz

Auschwitz, located near Oświęcim in occupied Poland, was the largest and most infamous Nazi death camp. Established in 1940 as a concentration camp, Auschwitz expanded into a complex of camps that included Auschwitz I (the original camp), Auschwitz II-Birkenau (the extermination centre), and Auschwitz III-Monowitz (a labour camp linked to the IG Farben chemical works). Auschwitz-Birkenau became the primary site of the Nazis’ extermination efforts, claiming the lives of approximately 1.1 million people, including 1 million Jews.

Victims arrived at Auschwitz-Birkenau by train, often after enduring inhumane conditions in overcrowded cattle cars. Upon arrival, they were subjected to a selection process conducted by SS doctors. Those deemed capable of work were sent to labour camps, while the rest were sent directly to the gas chambers. Zyklon B was introduced as the primary killing agent, allowing the Nazis to kill thousands of people daily.

Auschwitz also served as a site of inhumane medical experiments, many conducted by Josef Mengele, infamously known as the “Angel of Death.” Prisoners were subjected to experiments involving sterilisation, infectious diseases, and genetic studies, often resulting in death or permanent injury.

Today, Auschwitz stands as a symbol of the Holocaust, preserved as a memorial and museum to educate future generations about the atrocities committed there. Treblinka, located northeast of Warsaw, was one of the most deadly Nazi extermination camps. Established in 1942, it was designed specifically for the purpose of mass killing of the Jews of occupied Poland. In just over a year of operation, Treblinka claimed the lives of approximately 870,000 Jews, making it the second most lethal of the Nazi death camps after Auschwitz.

#c) Treblinka

Treblinka’s operations were highly streamlined. Victims arrived by train and were immediately sent to undressing rooms and then to gas chambers disguised as showers. Carbon monoxide from a large engine was used to kill those inside. Unlike Auschwitz, Treblinka did not function as a labour camp; its sole purpose was extermination.

In August 1943, a revolt by Jewish prisoners led to the partial destruction of the camp. Though many prisoners were killed during or after the uprising, it resulted in the escape of several survivors who later provided crucial testimonies. After the uprising, the Nazis dismantled the camp to conceal evidence of the atrocities, ploughing over the site and disguising it as a farm.

Treblinka’s efficiency and anonymity epitomised the industrialised killing process of the Holocaust. Despite the Nazis’ efforts to erase its existence, survivor accounts have ensured that Treblinka remains a significant part of Holocaust history.

#3. Case study: France under Nazi occupation (1940–44)

#A. The occupation of France: The geographic and political context

#a) Division of France: The Occupied Zone vs. Vichy France

Following the Armistice of Compiègne in June 1940, France was divided into two zones. The Occupied Zone, covering northern and western France, was controlled by the German military. The Unoccupied Zone, known as Vichy France, was governed by Marshal Philippe Pétain. While nominally independent, Vichy collaborated with the Nazis, enacting antisemitic laws and contributing to German economic and labour demands.

#b) Role of the Reich in exploiting France’s resources and people

Germany exploited France's resources to fuel its war machine, requisitioning agricultural produce, industrial output, and raw materials. The Service du Travail Obligatoire (STO) forcibly conscripted French workers for German industries, further impoverishing the population and fueling opposition. The exploitation extended to cultural theft, with art and cultural treasures looted from Jewish families and institutions.

#B. Free France and de Gaulle’s leadership

#a) L’appel du 18 juin 1940

On 18 June 1940, General Charles de Gaulle, recently appointed undersecretary for national defence, broadcast his famous “Appel du 18 Juin” on the BBC. Calling on French citizens to resist the Nazi occupation, de Gaulle’s message sought to galvanise support for continued fighting. Initially, it had limited impact as many French people still trusted Marshal Pétain.

Nevertheless, de Gaulle’s appeal attracted a small but determined group of supporters. By July 1940, around 7,000 French soldiers and sailors had joined him in Britain, forming the nucleus of the Free French movement. In London, de Gaulle established the Comité de la France Libre, creating a rudimentary state structure with funding, intelligence services, and propaganda facilitated through daily BBC broadcasts.

#b) The Forces Françaises Libres (FFL) and relations with Churchill

By the summer of 1940, the Free French forces included 3,000 volunteers, later expanding to 55,000 soldiers, sailors, and airmen by July 1943. Equipped by Britain but operating independently, the FFL played a crucial role in Allied operations. From 1940, they fought in North Africa alongside the British, notably in Libya and Tunisia, and rallied French colonies like Chad and Cameroon to the Free French cause.

De Gaulle’s relationship with Winston Churchill was pivotal yet fraught. Churchill viewed de Gaulle as a necessary symbol of French resistance but often found his independence and refusal to compromise frustrating. For his part, de Gaulle distrusted Anglo-American plans for post-war France, which he feared would marginalise French sovereignty. Despite their personal and political tensions, Churchill supported Free French efforts, providing military resources and logistical support.

Churchill's frustrations with de Gaulle's independence were balanced by recognition of his symbolic value. Their cooperation allowed France to regain its international standing, but Anglo-American concerns about post-war influence often sidelined de Gaulle in Allied strategy meetings.

The Free French forces, under de Gaulle’s leadership, were instrumental in campaigns such as the liberation of North Africa and the Provence landings. De Gaulle’s insistence that French troops liberate Paris in August 1944 ensured that France was seen as a vital member of the Allied coalition and secured its place among the victors of World War II.

#c) From Free France to the GPRF

De Gaulle consolidated political control through the Comité Français de Libération Nationale (CFLN), established in Algiers in May 1943. He sidelined rivals like General Giraud and presided over the formation of the Provisional Government of the French Republic (GPRF, Gouvernement Provisoire de la République Française) on 3 June 1944. This step pre-empted Anglo-American plans to administer liberated French territories directly. After the liberation of Paris on 25 August 1944, de Gaulle established the GPRF in the capital, asserting French sovereignty and ensuring that France was recognised as a victorious power.

#C. Daily life under Nazi rule

#a) Experiences of French citizens under occupation

Under occupation, French citizens faced severe hardships, including rationing, food shortages, and constant surveillance. Antisemitic laws imposed by Vichy led to events like the Vel d’Hiv (La Rafle)roundup in July 1942, where over 13,000 Jews were arrested and deported to Auschwitz, often with the complicity of French authorities. Many lived in fear of denunciation and repression, with resistance members and suspected dissenters facing arrest, execution, or deportation to concentration camps.

In urban areas like Paris, food shortages led to reliance on black markets, while rural regions sometimes fared better due to local farming. However, resistance activity in remote areas, such as the Vercors, provoked severe Nazi reprisals.

#b) Resistance and collaboration

The French response to occupation ranged from active resistance to full collaboration. Resistance groups like the Maquis conducted sabotage, gathered intelligence, and supported Allied operations. Meanwhile, collaborators, including the Milice (a paramilitary group loyal to Vichy), actively assisted German authorities in suppressing resistance and rounding up Jews.

This complexity underscored the fractured nature of French society during the occupation, with its effects lingering into post-war reconciliation efforts.