What was it like to be a Prisoner of War in Europe during WW2?

Following the outbreak of World War II in 1939, the Axis and Allied armies engaged in large battles across various fronts.

Due to the sheer size of these armies, when one of them was defeated or surrendered, the winning army had to decide what do to with the thousands of soldiers they now had under their control

This was a significant problem in early years of the war during the stages of rapid German expansion, including the invasion of Poland, the fall of France, and the relentless push into the Soviet Union known as Operation Barbarossa.

With the growing number of captured prisoners, all countries built prisoner of war camps (POW camps).

These camps were usually located away from major towns and cities, but close enough to military infrastructure that the camps could be guarded by soldiers.

Such camps were often built quickly and only included the most basic of materials to house the prisoners.

Ultimately, the captured men were intended to be held until the end of the war, or to be used in a 'prisoner exchange'.

However, all nations were expected to provide a minimum level of care to the men, especially if the country had signed the Geneva Convention.

The Geneva Convention is the cornerstone of international humanitarian law. It was designed to reduce the horrors of war and establish a set of guidelines for the humane treatment of prisoners.

The key document was known as the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War and was formally established on July 27, 1929.

It laid down specific rules for the treatment of POWs, including provisions for adequate food, shelter, and medical care, as well as protections against torture, forced labor, and execution without trial.

Nazi Germany, a political system that was a toxic blend of nationalism and racial ideology, generally followed the rules as outlined in the Geneva convention for the vast numbers of Allied soldiers they held.

However, it is important to remember that the Nazis did not consider other people groups, such as Jews, to be under the same protections.

As a result, they were sent to concentration camps, which were horrific places of slave labor and mass killings.

Unlike Germany, the Soviet Union had not ratified the Geneva Convention regarding the Treatment of Prisoners of War, and its treatment of captured soldiers was often dictated by a combination of ideological considerations and pragmatic needs.

As such, POWs were frequently subjected to harsh conditions, including forced labor, inadequate food, and minimal medical care.

The Soviet approach to POWs was also influenced by the bitter fighting on the Eastern Front, a theater of war that was extreme brutality for both sides.

This often led to a cycle of retribution and mistreatment, both in battles and in POW camps. 

Italy, although a lesser capturing power compared to Germany and the Soviet Union, also played a role in shaping the POW experience.

Italian treatment of prisoners was generally considered to be better than that of their German allies.

After Italy's surrender and the subsequent German occupation, many POWs who had been in Italian custody were transferred to German camps, where they faced significantly worse conditions. 

In Nazi Germany, the two primary types of camps were Stalags and Oflags. Stalags, short for "Stammlager," were primarily for enlisted men and were scattered throughout German-occupied territories.

These camps were often large and could hold thousands of prisoners. They generally included barracks-style housing, limited recreational activities, and a diet that met the bare minimum of caloric needs.

Despite the hardships, some semblance of order and even culture emerged within these camps: prisoners organized educational lectures, musical performances, and other activities to pass the time and maintain morale.

Oflags, on the other hand, were designed to house officers and were generally smaller and more secure than Stalags.

Officers were not required to work, in accordance with the Geneva Convention, and as a result, these camps had a different social dynamic.

Escape attempts were more frequent, often involving elaborate plans and even tunnels.

One of the most famous Oflags was Colditz Castle, a high-security camp that housed prisoners who had previously attempted escapes.

In the Soviet Union, the situation was markedly different. The Soviets did not differentiate between officers and enlisted men in the same way that the Germans did.

Instead, POWs were often sent to labor camps known as "Gulags," where they were subjected to forced labor in mines, forests, or construction projects.

The focus was less on security and more on extracting economic value from the prisoners, all while operating under severe resource constraints that often led to inadequate food and medical care.

The brutal winters and lack of proper clothing made survival itself a significant challenge. 

Life in POW camps during World War II could vary widely.  In German Stalags, for example, the daily routine often involved roll calls, rudimentary chores, and limited recreational activities.

Then, some prisoners were subjected to hard labor, while others were employed in tasks that were less physically demanding but monotonous.

Food was often scarce, and malnutrition was a common problem, leading to a host of health issues. 

It is estimated that of the 5.7 million Soviet soldiers imprisoned during WWII, more than 3.3 million died in captivity.

The situation in Soviet camps, the lack of food and medical supplies made daily life a struggle for survival.

Forced labor was the norm, and the work was often grueling. In addition, the absence of any formal structure for recreation or education left prisoners with few outlets for mental or emotional relief.

Many POWs in Soviet camps were also subjected to political indoctrination efforts, adding another layer of psychological strain. 

The Red Cross was an international aid organization that was tasked alleviating some of the suffering during the war.

However, given the scale of the world war, this was an almost impossible task. The Red Cross faced a continuing number of logistical, political, and ethical obstacles in order to provide aid to those in the camps.

One of the most tangible forms of this assistance was the distribution of Red Cross parcels.

These packages, which were filled with food, toiletries, and sometimes reading materials, were a supplement to the often-inadequate provisions supplied by captors.

However, to many of the prisoners, these parcels were also a psychological lifeline: a touch of humanity in an otherwise dehumanizing environment. 

In addition, the Red Cross also had a crucial role of monitoring the conditions of POW camps.

Although their inspections were sometimes hampered by restrictions imposed by the capturing powers, and their reports carefully assessed the living conditions and treatment of prisoners.

They acted as a subtle form of pressure on captors to adhere to the Geneva Convention, since very presence of an external humanitarian organization could sometimes lead to improvements in camp conditions, or at least deter the worst forms of abuse. 

Unfortunately, the role of the Red Cross had to operate within the constraints of international law and the realities of wartime logistics.

Not all POWs had equal access to Red Cross aid, particularly those in the Pacific theater or in the Eastern Front, where the organization's reach was more limited.

Moreover, the Red Cross faced ethical dilemmas, such as how to maintain its neutrality while bearing witness to egregious violations of human rights.

As World War II neared its conclusion, the desperation of the Axis powers manifested in increasingly brutal ways, particularly in the treatment of prisoners of war.

One of the most harrowing aspects of this dark period was the phenomenon of death marches.

As Allied forces advanced on Berlin, capturing powers, notably Nazi Germany, sought to evacuate POW camps to prevent the liberation of prisoners.

These forced marches involved moving large groups of emaciated and ill-equipped prisoners across great distances, often in extreme weather conditions and without adequate food, water, or medical care.

The term "death march" is apt, as these journeys resulted in high mortality rates due to exhaustion, starvation, and outright execution by guards. 

In some cases, POWs were executed en masse to eliminate what was perceived as a "burden" or potential threat.

These actions were in flagrant violation of the Geneva Convention and any semblance of humanitarian norms.

As Allied forces advanced into territories previously held by Axis powers, they seized many POW camps and release those imprisoned there.

Sadly, many of the POWs were in poor health due to the long-term effects of malnutrition, lack of medical care, or the physical and psychological toll of forced marches and labor.

Immediate medical attention was often required, and the liberating forces, along with organizations like the Red Cross, played a crucial role in providing emergency healthcare services. 

Once prisoners were returned to better health, the next phase was repatriation: the process of returning POWs to their home countries.

This was easier said than done, as it required a significant number of bureaucratic procedures, as the status of each prisoner had to be verified.

While the prospect of reuniting with loved ones was a source of immense joy, many POWs also grappled with the psychological scars of their experiences, a condition later understood as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

The reintegration into civilian life was a slow and often difficult process, requiring support from family, community, and sometimes professional mental health services. 

For Axis POWs held by the Allies, repatriation was often delayed after the war due to complex legal proceedings and political considerations.

Some German POWs, for example, were held in captivity for several years after the war, often employed in forced labor projects to help rebuild Europe.

The Soviet Union, too, was slow to repatriate its POWs, and many endured extended periods in labor camps before they were allowed to return home.

The discovery of the full extent of atrocities committed in POW camps galvanized the international community to take unprecedented steps in prosecuting war crimes.

The Nuremberg Trials, which commenced in November 1945, were the most high-profile of these legal proceedings.

The trials were groundbreaking in that they held individuals, including military officers and state officials, personally accountable for violations of international law, including the mistreatment of POWs. 

While the Nuremberg Trials focused primarily on high-ranking officials in Nazi Germany, other trials also took place to hold lower-ranking officers and guards accountable for their actions in POW camps.

These proceedings were often conducted by individual Allied nations in various locations across Europe and Asia.

They served a dual purpose: to mete out justice for specific, documented atrocities and to create a legal and ethical precedent for the treatment of POWs in future conflicts.

The trials were instrumental in shaping the third and fourth Geneva Conventions of 1949, which expanded and clarified international laws concerning the treatment of prisoners of war and civilians. 

However, not all perpetrators were brought to justice, and political considerations sometimes influenced the outcomes of these trials.

For instance, the Soviet Union's treatment of POWs was largely exempt from the kind of international scrutiny applied to Nazi Germany, partly due to the geopolitical dynamics of the emerging Cold War.

This selective application of justice raised questions about the efficacy and impartiality of international law.