By "Swiss" I mean a neutral third-party. Is there any way it can happen without departing too much from OTL WWII?
At which point the Allies will start asking pointed questions about Swiss companies trade with Nazi Germany and certain financial transactions/bank accounts.To keep proceedings honest, Swiss judges might insist on trying a few Allied war criminals like British “Bomber” Harris.
To keep proceedings honest, Swiss judges might insist on trying a few Allied war criminals like British “Bomber” Harris.
Nope, especially when the Swiss laundered much of the German funds and Holocaust gold during the Second World War:By "Swiss" I mean a neutral third-party. Is there any way it can happen without departing too much from OTL WWII?
You mean the ones that sold critical supplies to the Nazis and stood by while Norway was invaded?I think the Swiss might be compromised. What about the Swedes?
You mean the ones that sold critical supplies to the Nazis and stood by while Norway was invaded?
It would need to be someone completely unrelated and far away. Maybe a neutal South American country (not Argentina).
You mean the ones that sold critical supplies to the Nazis and stood by while Norway was invaded?
It would need to be someone completely unrelated and far away. Maybe a neutal South American country (not Argentina).
By "Swiss" I mean a neutral third-party. Is there any way it can happen without departing too much from OTL WWII?
Why would the Allies do this? All the Great Powers left were on their side so why have the trial conducted by neutrals? Who exactly are they trying to impress?
The thing is, allied bombing policy wasn’t a war crime as of 1945. What the Germans were prosecuted for were offenses that were already legally acknowledged war crimes. Indeed, Dönitz was saved because the US Navy testified that his naval policies were equivalent to the American ones.To keep proceedings honest, Swiss judges might insist on trying a few Allied war criminals like British “Bomber” Harris.
Portugal are your best bet