Horthy - war criminal ?

Hi Gentlemen,

Why was Horthy not tried as a war criminal? Why indeed? Here is a possible explanation (that verges on being anti-Semite, by the way):

Horthy was an anti-Semite. He did not like Jews. And that is about that. He never wanted to exterminate them. After Germans occupied Hungary in MAR44 there were certain concessions to be made. Ethnic-Germans in Hungary were sacrificed to SS-conscription, Honvéd units were sent to the Eastern Front and yes, Jews were sent to Auschwitz. This was done to buy time and keep Horthy in power and Arrow Cross out.

Now, let us elaborate a bit on the Jewish issue. As I have read it in a book, Horthy did not like the small time Jew (i.e. shop-owner, craftsmen etc.) but thought that the big industrialsts (Weiss, Chorin etc) are essential for Hungary as they are organizing the industry and the job cannot be taken over. Hitler was constantly annoyed by this stance. Horthy's son was even "worse" from this aspect.

So when the time came when concessions were to be made Horthy thought that the small time Jew is readily expendable but the industrialist are to be saved (Wilhelm Höttl said in an interview that Horthy pleaded something like this: "Please do not deport my Bridge partners." - He used to play Bridge with Weiss and the rest). I suspect there was a rather dirty deal arranged. I think it was along the lines: Germans get the small time Jews (Albert Speer could hardly wait the work force he was promised) with no fuss (Rezső Kasztner was to see to that) while the industrialists (and the Budapest Jewry) is spared for signing away their factories to the SS. And the deal worked until the Arrow Cross takeover.

Horthy was present in Nuremberg and he was a bit anxious until the Americans assured them that he was going to be a witness only. After that ordeal was over he moved to Portugal (as far as I know a fascist regime by then) where he spent the rest of his life in exile. He was living in a villa in Estoril and guess who paid the bills. Ferenc Chorin, an ex-Hungarian Jewish tycoon.

So the answer to the original question "Why was Horthy not tried as a war criminal" may be two words "Jewish gratitude". If you happen to visit the Horthy crypt in Kenderes you may see material evidence to this:
Scroll down to the 2nd and 3rd photos
I have seen that ribbon (hálás zsidóság=grateful Jewry) with my own eyes some ten years ago, and that link shows it is still there.

Bye,
Krisz

PS: just for info: I am NOT an anti-Semite...

Horthy's memoirs give lots of details on evolution of anti-semitism in a Hungary led by his wisdom. And one should not forget that the first anti-semitic law in Europe was a Hungarian one, in 1920. Long before Hitler, Mussolini, or Goga-Cuza in Romania.

http://www.fortunecity.com/victorian/wooto.../horthy/16.html



ADMIRAL MIKLÓS HORTHY: MEMOIRS
Chapter Sixteen
THE SECOND WORLD WAR; HUNGARY'S NON-BELLIGERENCE

This post has been edited by mateias on December 15, 2007 09:20 am

Hi,

Yeah, and if I wanted to be cynical I would say Hungary only followed the lead of a great democracy, namely the USA where some informal restrictions were in place since 1918.

Now let us examine the situation: Hungary lost two thirds of her territory and the new masters did not really need Hungarian intelligentsia. These people became refugees, mostly living in railroad waggons in Budapest. And what did they see? Jews, who had been over-represented in the Communist revolution, took up most of the fine jobs in the capital (48 percent of doctors, 57 percent of lawyers, a whopping 81 percent of bank and insurance employees etc.). This gave rise to resentment. The government needed to do something. Instead of banning the Jews from these jobs they installed a quota system to allow every nationality to have a share in university and college tutition up to at least 90 percent of their ratio in the population. This was negative discrimination against the Jews and positive discrimination for all the others. The percentage of Jewish students fell from 30 percent to around 8-10 percent (so it never reached the 6 percent ratio of the population) and foreign (i.e. Vienna) tutition was still open to them. This numerus clausus was abandoned in 1928.

You may disagree but I see this legislation not as an anti-Semitic law but rather a "protective measure". Something was thrown to the dogs who could chew on so radical changes could be averted while the Jews were not harmed needlessly.

Bye,
Krisz

I wonder if 1 (one) day counts in history.
The difference is between March 18 (Horthy's promise to Hitler on 100,000 Hungarian Jews to be dispatched to Germany as workers in forced labour camps) and March 19, 1943 (afterwards the number rose to 725,000 Hungarian Jews and Jews of Romanian residence captured after the Vienna Diktat in the area of Transylvania given to Hungary).

http://www.scrapbookpages.com/AuschwitzScr...garianJews.html

This post has been edited by mateias on January 11, 2008 03:52 pm

Mateias, first you should learn about the circumastances of that meeting in order to have a clearer picture.

Here is an excerpt of the book manuscript I wrote:
"On the 15th [of March] – Hungary’s National day – Hitler invited Horthy to his residence in Klessheim, reportedly to discuss matters raised in the letter written earlier by the Hungarian Regent. Horthy grew suspicious of Hitler’s real intentions, but eventually decided to accept the invitation, on advise of his Foreign Minister, Ghyczy, and Chief of Staff, Szombathelyi. Vice-Admiral Horthy arrived aboard his special train, called Turul – the mythical bird of Hungary – to the Railway Station of Klessheim on March 18, being personally greeted by Hitler. In the subsequent meeting, Hitler bluntly informed Horthy that he is aware of Kállay’s "treacherous" politics and therefore decided to occupy Hungary to prevent the one-sided step out of the war of Germany’s Eastern neighbor. He even threatened to allow "friendly" Rumanian and Slovak troops to "assist" the German occupation, meaning the loss of Transylvania and Upper Hungary and possibly more. Horthy protested vehemently, and left the castle without saluting the Führer. He wanted to leave Klessheim immediately, but Szombathelyi and Csatay persuaded him to go to a second meeting with Hitler and try to negotiate the terms. In view of his country’s fate, Horthy finally changed his mind and returned to the castle later the evening. Hitler repeated his plans, but promised if the distrusted Kállay would be replaced with a pro-German Prime Minister, the German occupation will be only temporary. Eventually, the two Axis leaders settled the details and Horthy was allowed to return to Hungary instead of being interned."

Also, the source you quoted mentions that there were 725,000 Jews living in Hungary in 1944. This is NOT the total number of Jews deported by the Germans to the IIIrd Reich, but the overall number of Jews reportedly exising in Hungary at that time. About half of them managed to remain in Hungary, also due to Horthy's strict stance in not allowing Jews from Budapest to be deported.

Finally, I cannot qualify your sentence: "...Jews of Romanian residence captured after the Vienna Diktat in the area of Transylvania given to Hungary."
The Jews in Northern Transylvania were all Hungarian citizens and had no Rumanian residence, or similar.

About "the Vienna Diktat (...) the area of Transylvania given to Hungary", please see the separate thread on this controversial topic.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on January 11, 2008 05:39 pm

Your last sentence is correct as long you consider only the period of time starting in September 1940.
The same Jews from Northern Transylvania were Romanian citizens before that date. Then I guess they received documents of Hungarian citizenship from the newly installed Hungarian authorities. I assume the Romanian nationals received these papers of Hungarian citizenship, too. Only the Jews born in Northern Transylvania starting with September 1940 were Hungarian citizens from the very first day of their life.

The quote you are mentioning has the flaw of not being too clear and allows to be targeted, but your sentence may be subject to correction, too.

Very unfortunately, this confuse situation about citizenship and place of residence allowed some historians to mention the hundreds of thousands of Jews rounded up by the Hungarian authorities in the summer of 1944, and given to the Third Reich, as Jews living in Romania, and killed by the Romanian authorities. Also some Jewish organizations came up with the same approach, in order to put political pressure toward Romania, when they targeted certain demands.

This post has been edited by Florin on January 12, 2008 04:28 am

Krisz, you really made me curious with this one.
Can you suggest to me some sources of information?
All I knew until now was the police of New York rounding up Jews who came from Russia, and sending them back to Europe. The spirits were overheated after a truck filled with explosives blew up on Wall Street, and of course the Communists had to be blamed, and of course who were the Communists?

This post has been edited by Florin on January 12, 2008 04:42 am

Florin, if you want to go along that route, you have to go all way.

All Rumanian citizens you mentioned, older than 19 years, were Hungarian citizens before 1921. Therefore, a Jew (and not only), who was born before 1921 in Northern Traqnsylvania was first a Hungarian citizen, then Rumanian, and then Hungarian again. Those lucky one who survived until 1945 and returned home became Rumanian citizens again. Quite a 'citizenship rollercoaster', isn't it? However, this case not the worst in the region. Several years ago I saw a documentary with an old man, living what is now the most south-western tip of Ukraine (the Sub-Carpathian region), who had six citizenships, all different, without him ever leaving his village!

As for who is claiming what for a particular person, based on his/her citizenship(s), is valid on both ways. Also, many famous/infamous non-Rumanians born in Transylvania are claimed by certain historians to be Rumanian for various reasons. Therefore, one should be aware of the essential difference between one's ethnicity and citizenship - which obviously is not necessarily the same - and stay consequent all the way...
In our case, the Jews deported fom Northern Transylvania in 1944 were the victims of the Germans, assisted by Hungarian authorities, and not the Rumanian State at all.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on January 12, 2008 11:25 am

I think what eventually defines an individual as belonging to a certain country are his achievements, and in what country he achieved his dreams. What is really important is what that individual considered as his country, based on the public statements he made.
I’ll try few examples.

Aurel Vlaicu was technically Austro-Hungarian citizen, but his cherished goal was to build his airplanes in Romania, and he dedicated his life for the benefit of Romania, while he could achieve more in Germany.

Or the case of the Hungarian aristocrat, with interest in Paleontology, who was so sour by the transition of Transylvania into Romanian control, that he donated his famous collection of dwarf dinosaur skeletons (discovered in Transylvania) to the Museum of Natural History in New York, just to be sure they are far away from Romania.

Most interesting are the people who achieved a lot in two countries. To whom they belong, eventually? Like Igor Sikorsky, Enrico Fermi or Werner von Braun.
As this subject emerged from the case of the Jews, it is interesting to see that while they were disliked everywhere, every country was so eager to take the merit and the pride for its own great citizens who happened to be Jews.

This post has been edited by Florin on January 13, 2008 07:36 pm

What you said, Florin, is very true. More so for the famous Jewish ethnics born in a certain country.

As for Aurel Vlaicu (and Traian Vuia, for that matter), although they were both born in what was back then Hungary, I saw no Hungarian claim whatsoever, which would say that they were pioneers of the Hungarian aviation.

By the contrary, I saw in a recently published sizeable - otherwise excellent - encyclopaedia of Rumanian aviation the name of Martin Lajos - a famed Hungarian aviation pioneer - included [born in 1827 in Budapest, who died in what was then Kolozsvár (now Cluj) in 1897]...

But let's get back to the topic, i.e. Horthy and his wartime activity.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on April 09, 2009 08:20 pm

Hallo Gen. Denes and all other members here,
Ok, let's get back to the topic, i.e. Horthy and his wartime activity -as Gen. Denes said.
My personal problem is not with the jews, and the hungarian authorities, under Horthy or Szálasi, but the romanian civilians issue. The romanian ethnics living in occupied Northern Transilvania, especially, feel on their own skin the policy of the Rendorseg, Csebdorseg and other paramilitary detachments (sustained when necessary by the hungarian army) who did the killings, beatenings, tortures, terrorising and threatening the unarmed civilians. For the only reason they were romanians. And Horthy has nothing to do with it in a country in which he was the ruler? -see f.i. the relates of Gyorgy Ferenczy, szekely-origin journalist, who describes the criminal policy and hatered climate from inside (decent honorable people you can find everywhere!) in the revenge dominated authorities of Horthy regime. And the official policy in which the royal army, police, gendarmery and paramilitary detachment work together for the same purpose.
The huge number of atrocities -22.700 documented- for a period of one year -september 1940 -november 1941, speaks more then anything else! And the ruler, the regent, the dictator, has nothing to do with it? He's not to blame? He's not a criminal, he's just a accomplice with the murderers, right! No one was charged for all that, but Horthy (like german officials who did not know what happened with the thousands and thousands of innocent civilians brutally killed in extermination camps), has nothing to do with that? We are, at least I believe we are, no stupid, and just for this tragic episode Horthy is surely guilty!

The problem with your post is that apparently you rely solely on selected Rumanian sources, some of them published in the 1980s, at political order, when tension between the two (officially friendly and allied) countries rose pretty high. Would you please list your sources, so we would know how reliable they are? I bet the pillar is the infamous "Teroarea horthysto-fascista in nord-vestul Transilvaniei", Editura Politică (!), Bucharest, 1985. If so, as I said, the book is discredited by the strong national-communist political influence upon it.

Other than that, although undeniable attrocities committed by Hungarian police and military did occasionally occur, it was not a state policy to extermine ethnic Rumanians living within wartime Hungary's borders, so no war crime was actually committed. These issues were discussed in great details, in this forum and elsewhere, too.

The bottom line is, no matter how much would some people like to see Regent Horthy somehow declared (now at least posthumously) a war criminal, a hineous murderer, etc., he was not - and that's a fact those people have to live with.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on April 09, 2009 08:22 pm

No, actually my opinion wasn't that the state policy of Horthy-ruled-Hungary was to extermine ethnic Rumanians but to revenge the so-called 1919 Trianon disaster (desintegration of historical Hungary) and also to frighten the romanian population living there. And also to win some territories between the hungarians-lived insles from Szatmar and Bihar districts with Kolosvar and Marosvasarhely majorities. By cleansing the territories! A long term policy which, by the way, continued even after 1945, when the communists sustained by the soviets came in power...

It is interesting how everybody keeps avoiding an issue: if Horthy wasn't declared, trialed and sentenced (like, say, Antonescu ), then he wasn't a war criminal! Is that so? On the same line, Hitler wasn't either - only because he committed suicide, just to avoid that fate.
IMO, the simple fact that under his rule war crimes were committed makes him a war criminal. Full stop.

MMM et al., it's not your opinion (or mine, for that matter) that counts, but the competent forums', specialised in prosecuting war criminals.

Horthy was invited to the Nürnberg war court, but only as a witness. No charges were laid against him.
Also, if indeed war crimes were committed against Rumanian civilians that could be proven in a court of justice, then Rumania would have surely asked for his extradiction. This did not happen. Same with Yugoslavia or Slovakia.

As I said earlier, "the bottom line is, no matter how much would some people like to see Regent Horthy somehow declared (now at least posthumously) a war criminal, a hineous murderer, etc., he was not - and that's a fact those people have to live with."

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on April 16, 2009 03:22 pm