著者

深川 美奈

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2000, no.125, pp.79-95,L12, 2000-10-13 (Released:2010-09-01)

参考文献数

70

---

John J. McCloy, the U. S. High Commissioner for Germany, wrote to Secretary of State John Foster Dulles when Konrad Adenauer won the election of parliament in 1953: “We cannot in my judgment, lift our hand and influence from the internal German developments. The roots of sound parliamentary behavior are not deeply enough embedded in German soil for us to take a different position. This is a great step forward domestically but German nationalism and its demoniac counterparts have not been completely exorcised.” Why did he point out that German society was not yet democratized after more than five years of defeat? This paper deals with the formation of democratization policy of American military Government and its successor, the American High Commission. It focuses on the period from defeat of Germany (May 1945) to June 1952 in which American democratization program ended at the local level. I pay attention to the formation and development of denazification policy by both the American Military Government and German and re-education (re-orientation) program by Kreis Resident Officer of Land commission. In this paper, I divide the period into four parts according to its peculiarities. I examine how American policies developed and why these policies failed finally. American Military Government carried out denazification and re-education on purpose to democratize German society. How and where did Americans locate democratization policy after a switch in economic recovery policy in 1947?Denazification in the American zone was carried out with initial severity. In applying the rough-and-ready procedure to Germans, the consequences have been more than ordinarily severe. Proof of this action can be seen in the dismissal not only of those whose removal was required by the directive but also of those in whose case discretion was allowed. Since the influence of Nazism was rather stronger than American authority had predicted, American officials realized that denazification could not be accomplished without German help.German law, entitled “For Liberation from National Socialism and Militarism, ” which was enacted on March 5, 1946, classified ideological offenders in terms of past guilt and future danger and tried to assess penalties proportionate to the guilt and danger. But the number of cases to be handled by judicial machinery was amounting to the great majority of the adult population that the process of rectification was slow as the complications accumulated. Germans were not satisfied with prohibition and restriction of employment.Though process of denazification was promoted by amnesties and amended law, staffs of local authority on denazification could not deal with the cases of major offenders. As a result, the ex-Nazi forces which succeeded in rehabilitation were much more than those who were politically purged.It was estimated that denazification policy ended in failure or was not completely carried out. However, the matter was not so simple for the democratization in postwar west Germany. Although denazification was not completely carried out as a whole, it contributed to change in the German top leadership in the postwar era. American army authority appointed the persons on the “White List, ” who were anti-Nazi or non-Nazi, and could be pro-American to the post of leadership after the examination of denazification. They proceeded to democratization with collaboration with the American Military Government. Hence, antidemocratic power could not be strong when the Federal Republic of Germany was establised.Nevertheless, denazification of the middle class was not fully carried out. Since the influence of Nazism mostly penetrated into the middle class, it was impossible to eliminate the influence completely by denazification.