THE PEOPLE AND THE BOOK

An in-depth  illuminating account of WWII Nazi fugitives in the UK and their escape from British justice.

By Dr. Efraim Zuroff director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center (Israel)

The book ‘Safe Haven’ is one that should attract several diverse audiences of readers. Former BBC reporter Jon Silverman, who covered the British Nazi War Crimes Act issue from beginning to end, and his co-author Robert Sherwood, an expert on the post-World War II prosecution of Nazi war criminals, have written an excellent history of the fate of the legislation passed in the British Parliament in Spring 1991 to enable the prosecution of Holocaust perpetrators living in the United Kingdom. Theirs is a cautionary tale regarding an important and highly justified judicial initiative, launched to prosecute Nazi war criminals who had illegally immigrated to Great Britain, which in practical terms, only ONE individual was convicted and punished out of many clearly guilty perpetrators. This was a miserable failure but ultimately had a positive impact on Holocaust consciousness in the United Kingdom.

Escaping Justice. ‘SAFE HAVEN’ by Jon Silverman and Robert Sherwood is the first book to examine the police and legal inquiries in the UK after the passage of the War Crimes Act in 1991. It provides revelatory information about Nazi collaborators in Eastern Europe given refuge in Britain after 1945 and explains why there was only one conviction out of hundreds of cases.

The authors explain the practical “failure” of the bill in great detail, and point out how quite a few more mass murderers could have been convicted, had the British legal bureaucracy been more flexible, and had there been greater political will to convict and punish these Eastern European Nazi collaborators. Thus, this story is not only about the Holocaust, or post-World War II justice, but also about how governments function and how justice is or isn’t achieved in a leading Western democracy. On a personal level, the book also deals with an important chapter of the efforts of the Simon Wiesenthal Center to help facilitate the prosecution of Nazi criminals. In 1986, I was hired by the center to open an office in Jerusalem, which would focus on Eastern European Nazi collaborators who had immigrated to Western democracies. By this point, it was common knowledge that all the major Anglo-Saxon democracies which had fought against the Nazis had admitted at least dozens, if not hundreds, of the worst of Hitler’s henchmen as refugees. (The only exception was South Africa, which was closed hermetically to immigration in those years.) Canada and Australia had already been alerted to the problem and were discussing possible steps to take, but Great Britain and New Zealand ostensibly had no indication that they also had the same problem. On October 22, 1986, however, the Wiesenthal Center submitted a list I compiled of 17 Latvian and Lithuanian Nazi collaborators living in Great Britain to Donald Ballentine, the British consul in Los Angeles, which marked the beginning of the process that led to the War Crimes Act. We subsequently sent 50 more names to the British authorities and did our best, together with the local supporters of the initiative, to convince the government to pass the bill and maximize its impact. The “heart” of the book and its most interesting chapters are about the sole conviction, how it was achieved, and the cases of suspects who were obviously guilty but for technical reasons or simple bad luck (their premature demise or the refusal of eyewitnesses to their crimes to testify against them) could not be convicted. Thus, for example, Anthony Sawoniuk, a cruel Byelorussian policeman who participated in many executions of Jews in his hometown of Domachevo, was successfully convicted because of the testimony of eyewitnesses to the murder of local Jewish women and the fact that he was the only person in town named Andrusha. In three other cases, the British police and prosecutors were not so lucky, and as a result, mass murderers from Lithuania, Latvia, and Belarus escaped punishment.

Murderer of Thousands. War crimes suspect Anton Gecas who died in 2001 and never brought to trial, was the head of a special police battalion responsible for the murder of tens of thousands of Jews, partisans and Communist Party members in Lithuania and Belarus in 1941.

The most famous case was that of Antanas Gecevicius, who changed his name in Scotland to Anton Gecas. He was the “star” of my original list, having served as an officer in the notorious Lithuanian 12th Auxiliary Police Battalion, which was sent in October 1941 to Belarus, where they murdered at least 20,000 Jews. According to members of his unit, who were prosecuted in Soviet Lithuania, Gecas not only issued orders to murder Jews but finished off those not killed by the initial round of bullets. Gecas denied the accusations and filed a defamation suit against Scottish TV, and he sued me for libel because I accused him of those crimes in my book Occupation: Nazi-Hunter. Gecas lost his suit against Scottish TV and was called a criminal; but luckily for him, the standard of proof was based on the civil standard, which fell short of the threshold of “beyond a reasonable doubt,” which would have paved the way for his prosecution. In addition, at least a dozen veterans of Gecas’s unit were found living in the UK, to whom the Scottish war crimes team were ready to grant immunity if they testified against Gecas. But the British refused to exempt them from prosecution, and without that promise none of them were willing to testify against him. Some of them were willing to answer a few questions about the unit but not to deliver strong enough evidence against Gecas.

Jew-Killer Convicted. In Britain’s war crimes trial at the Old Bailey in 1999, Anthony Sawoniuk was given two life sentences in 1999 for the murder of 18 Jews in his hometown of Domachevo, which was then in Nazi-occupied Byelorussia (now Belarus) in 1942. (Photo: Reuters)

A second case of a murder squad officer who immigrated to Britain and escaped prosecution, was that of Latvian Harijs Skiveris, who had been a senior officer in the Latvian Auxiliary Security Police, commonly referred to as the Arajs Kommando (named for its commander Viktor Arajs, who was convicted in Germany of the murder of 13,000 Jews and was sentenced to life imprisonment). Thirty additional members of the unit were executed for war crimes in the Soviet Union. Skiveris, who signed documents as “Head of Security, Kommando”, and “Battalion Commander”, was obviously one of the most important officers in the unit, which played a key role in the majority of the murders of approximately 30,000 Jews in and around Riga (initially in Bikerenieki Forest, and later at Rumbula), as well as in the provincial Latvian towns. In 1942, moreover, the unit was sent to combat pro-Soviet partisans in Belarus, where they killed partisans and burned down entire villages. Skiveris, of course, denied that he committed any crimes or even was present when Germans shot Jews. The problem was, however, that he could not be prosecuted because there was no direct evidence that Skiveris served as Arajs’s adjutant or as a battalion commander, and the prosecution did not have any live, legally admissible eyewitness evidence of his participation in the murder of innocents.

Killers in the UK. Latvian Harijs Skiveris, who immigrated to Britain and escaped prosecution had been a senior officer in the infamous Latvian Auxiliary Security Police commonly referred to as the Arãjs Kommando, seen here in this 1942 group photo.  (Photo: State Archive of Latvia.)

The third case of a guilty criminal who escaped punishment despite his crimes was that of Szymon Serafinowicz, who was the first person prosecuted under the 1991 War Crimes Act. Various testimonies accused Serafinowicz of active participation in the mass murder of the Jews of Mir, especially the testimony of Dov Resnik, who saw Serafinowicz murder his 16-year-old son and a friend Aron Rudicki, along with his wife and two children. On July 12, 1995, Serafinowicz was arrested and charged with four counts of murder. At that point, he was 84 years old but was considered physically and mentally capable to stand trial. According to the authors, if Serafinowicz would have been put on trial in 1995 or early 1996, a historic conviction could have been obtained. Unfortunately, the trial was delayed by a committal procedure, which was a test run of the prosecution’s case before a magistrate without a jury, a step which the lawyers who supported the War Crimes Act recommended to omit. And indeed, the delay caused by the committal process spared Serafinowicz from a conviction and a punishment, since he had begun to suffer from Alzheimer’s disease and could not be prosecuted. Sawoniuk was convicted in 1999 and sentenced to life imprisonment. He died in jail in 2005. The Serafinowicz investigation was the last of its kind, which meant that only one Holocaust perpetrator who had entered Britain illegally was convicted and punished, clearly a terribly dismal result, which the authors very cogently explain could have been far better. They do, however, leave us with a silver lining, as they assert that the tremendous efforts invested in passing the War Crimes Act and trying to implement it helped:

Saved by Alzheimer’s. Due to a delay in court proceedings and the onset of Alzheimer’s disease, Szymon Serafinowicz (center)  – who is seen here escorted by policemen from the Epsom magistrates court after he was charged with the murder of four Jews in the years 1941 and 1942 in Nazi occupied Byelorussia – escaped conviction and punishment. (Photo: JOHNNY EGGITT/AFP via Getty Image)

 “change the status of the Holocaust in British culture and society…and helped to mark the dawn of the institutionalization of the Holocaust; a process aligned to the formation of cultural memory, and one which climax a decade later by Holocaust Memorial Day and other events.”



SAFE HAVEN: The United Kingdom’s Investigations into Nazi Collaborators and the Failure of Justice
Jon Silverman and Robert Sherwood
Oxford University Press, 2023
336 pages; £43.8



About the writer:

Dr. Efraim Zuroff. Director, Simon Wiesenthal Center – Israel office and Eastern European Affairs. Coordinator, SWC Nazi war crimes research worldwide
1 Mendele Street
Jerusalem, Israel 92147
Tel: 972.2.563.1273/4/5
Fax: 972.2.563.1276
www.swcjerusalem.org <http://www.swcjerusalem.org









NINE THINGS TO KNOW ABOUT THE HOUTHI’S ATTACK ON ISRAEL

The fire burning in Yemeni port is Israel’s message delivered loud and clear.

By Jonathan Feldstein

In the pre-dawn hours Friday, Israel time, central Tel Aviv was attacked by an explosive drone fired by the Houthis, an Iranian proxy terrorist group in Yemen. Due to what the IDF says was human error, the drone was identified but not shot down by air defenses, nor were air raid sirens activated. This is what you need to know.

THE DISTANCE

The drone has been identified as an Iranian-made Samad-3, modified to have an extended range as Tel Aviv is some 1800 kilometers, more than 1100 miles, from Yemen. It reportedly flew at a low altitude for several hours via the Red Sea and over Egyptian territory, before striking Israel from the west over the Mediterranean Sea.

Hitting Houthis. Israel strikes Houthis 1,800km or 1,118 miles away in Yemen after drone hits Tel Aviv.

THE VICTIMS

A 50-year-old man was found dead in his apartment, apparently killed by shrapnel. Several were injured.

From Yemen with Hate. Yevgeny Ferder was killed in an explosive Houthi drone attack from Yemen on Tel Aviv in the early hours of July 19, 2024. (Courtesy)

THE WEAPON

In order to reach Tel Aviv through this indirect route over Egypt, it is believed that the Houthis modified the Iranian-made Samad-3 drone, decreasing the size of the explosive from 18 kilos to 10 kilos, and adding extra fuel. As much as the Houthis are an Iranian backed proxy terrorist organization, their use of Iranian weapons and its implications are under close scrutiny by Israel, by the west, and by the Iranian regime. How Israel is able to detect and respond to such attacks is something that all learn from.

Houthi’s Supplier. An Iranian Shahed-129 drone is displayed at a rally in Tehran, Iran. (Photo: AP/Ebrahim Noroozi)

THE TARGET

The drone approached Israel from the west. Albeit flying low, it may have been meant to appear harmless, along the flight pattern of many approaching commercial aircraft. It struck central Tel Aviv near to where the US Embassy Branch Office is located, but it is unclear whether that was the target. The day before, the US reportedly destroyed other drones, however the IDF reported that these are separate incidents. The Houthis have declared that this is a “new phase” in their attacks against Israel.

Targeting Tel Aviv. People in Tel Aviv look at building hit by a Houthi drone in a deadly June 18 attack from Yemen on July 19, 2024. (Photo: Jamal Awad/Flash90)

WHO ARE THE HOUTHIS

The Iran-backed Houthis took over southern Yemen and its capital, Sanaa, from its Sunni government in 2014. They control large parts of the country and remain in conflict with the Saudi-backed Yemeni government. Along with Hamas, Hezbollah, and other Iranian-backed terror groups, they are part of the “axis of resistance” against Israel. Since November 2023, they have fired hundreds of drones and missiles at Israel, and attacked ships along the southern tip of the Arabian Peninsula, and Red Sea, disrupting global shipping even through Egypt’s Suez Canal.

Heated Houthis. Fired-up Houthi supporters screaming venom against Israel in Sanaa, Yemen July 5, 2024. (Photo: REUTERS/KHALED ABDULLAH)

ISRAEL’S RESPONSE

Due to the attack, the Israeli cabinet ministers gathered in an emergency session on Saturday, Shabbat (the Sabbath). Typically, public business and government activities do not take place on the Sabbath, indicating that this was a seen as a serious military situation that required an immediate response, and that further Israeli restraint was not an option.

IDF Spokesman Daniel Hagari noted this was a particularly complicated mission, using F-15’s, F-35’s, and other aircraft including refueling planes to carry out ten airstrikes against Houthi military targets around Yemen’s Hodeidah port, used to transport Iranian weapons.

Other than the immediacy of the response, Israel’s targeting of military facilities 1,800 kilometers (1,100 miles) away, is a signal to Iran. Tehran is also about 1800 kilometers from Israel. Some might consider this a test run for an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear and other military facilities.  In addition to the distance, Israel’s response indicated that it has significant intelligence capabilities, also a warning to Iran, Hezbollah and others.

Rapid Reply. In response to Houthi’s drone attack on Tel Aviv, Israeli fighter jets attack the Yemeni port of Hodeidah leaving it ablaze as oil tanks burn. (Photo AP)

After the Israeli response, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said:

 “The fire that is currently burning in Hodeidah, is seen across the Middle East and the significance is clear. The Houthis attacked us over 200 times. The first time that they harmed an Israeli citizen, we struck them. And we will do this in any place where it may be required.”

WHAT’S NEXT

Despite Israel’s attack, the IDF issued no new civilian security instructions indicating a higher state of alert. Prime Minister Netanyahu is still planning to embark on his trip to the United States to meet President Biden, and address a joint session of Congress.

After the attack near the US Embassy office, Netanyahu is expected to double down on highlighting the Islamic regime’s increasing efforts to destroy Israel, their terrorist tentacles throughout the Middle East, and apparently accelerating their nuclear weapons drive. Secretary of State Blinken said Iran could be just “one to two weeks away” from having enough nuclear material for a bomb.

Three months after Iran’s own unprecedented missile and drone attack, Netanyahu’s message is all the more relevant. Saturday night he said:

 “Anyone who wishes to see a stable and safe Middle East needs to stand against Iran’s axis of evil, and support Israel’s fight against Iran and its proxies – in Yemen, in Gaza, in Lebanon, everywhere.”

Israel informed the US and other regional governments in advance of its strike against the Houthi targets. While it does not seem that any immediate threats of escalation from the Houthis or others are on the horizon, there is the potential that the direct retaliation against the Houthis could trigger still further response from Yemen or other Iranian proxies, especially if Netanyahu is out of the country on an important visit to Washington.

ARAB ALLIES

In addition to notifying Washington in advance, there are indications that Arab countries were also informed. The Saudis, who are also in conflict with and have been attacked by the Houthis, could possibly have assisted by allowing the use of their airspace. While the Saudis and the Egyptians  – whose airspace was both breached – could not directly or indirectly to be seen supporting Israel’s attack, it is not unreasonable to speculate they at least they were silently celebrating.

CURRENT EVENTS OR PROPHESY?

So said the Lord:

For three sins of Edom, yea for four, I will not return them: For pursuing their brother with a sword, and they destroyed their mercy and grasped forever their anger and kept their fury forever.  And I will send fire into Teman (Yemen), and it shall consume the palaces of Bozrah.”

(Amos 1:11-12)


Israel strikes Houthi targets in Yemen




About the writer:

Jonathan Feldstein ­­­­- President of the US based non-profit Genesis123 Foundation whose mission is to build bridges between Jews and Christians – is a freelance writer whose articles appear in The Jerusalem Post, Times of Israel, Townhall, NorthJersey.com, Algemeiner Jornal, The Jewish Press, major Christian websites and more.