Argentina's top court finds 80 boxes of Nazi materials in its basement
The 83 boxes were sent by the Germany embassy in Tokyo to Argentina in June 1941 aboard the Japanese steamship "Nan-a-Maru," according to the history that the court was able to piece together, it said in a statement.
At the time, the large shipment drew the attention of authorities, who feared its contents could affect Argentina's neutrality in the war.
Despite claims at the time from German diplomatic representatives that the boxes held personal items, Argentine customs authorities searched five boxes at random.
They found postcards, photographs and propaganda material from the Nazi regime, as well as thousands of notebooks belonging to the Nazi party. A federal judge confiscated the materials, and referred the matter to the Supreme Court.
It was not immediately clear why the items were sent to Argentina or what, if any, action the Supreme Court took at the time.
Eighty-four years later, court staffers came across the boxes as they prepared for a Supreme Court museum.
"Upon opening one of the boxes, we identified material intended to consolidate and propagate Adolf Hitler's ideology in Argentina during World War II," the court said.
The court has now transferred the boxes to a room equipped with extra security measures, and invited the Holocaust Museum in Buenos Aires to participate in their preservation and inventory.
Experts will also examine them for any clues about still-unknown aspects of the Holocaust, such as international financing networks used by the Nazis.
Argentina remained neutral in World War II until 1944, when it broke relations with Axis powers. The South American country declared war on Germany and Japan the following year.
From 1933 to 1954, according to the Holocaust Museum, 40,000 Jews entered Argentina as they fled Nazi persecution in Europe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Korea Herald
3 hours ago
- Korea Herald
US, EU reach 15% tariff deal
TURNBERRY, Scotland (Reuters) -- The US struck a framework trade agreement with the European Union on Sunday, imposing a 15 percent import tariff on most EU goods -- half the threatened rate -- and averting a bigger trade war between the two allies that account for almost a third of global trade. US President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced the deal at Trump's luxury golf course in western Scotland after an hour-long meeting that pushed the hard-fought deal over the line, following months of negotiations. "I think this is the biggest deal ever made," Trump told reporters, lauding EU plans to invest some $600 billion in the United States and dramatically increase its purchases of US energy and military equipment. Trump said the deal, which tops a $550 billion deal signed with Japan last week, would expand ties between the trans-Atlantic powers after years of what he called unfair treatment of US exporters. Von der Leyen, describing Trump as a tough negotiator, said the 15 percent tariff applied "across the board,' later telling reporters it was "the best we could get." "We have a trade deal between the two largest economies in the world, and it's a big deal. It's a huge deal. It will bring stability. It will bring predictability," she said. The agreement mirrors key parts of the framework accord reached by the US with Japan, but like that deal, it leaves many questions open, including tariff rates on spirits, a highly charged topic for many on both sides of the Atlantic. The deal, which Trump said calls for $750 billion of EU purchases of US energy in coming years and "hundreds of billions of dollars" of arms purchases, likely spells good news for a host of EU companies, including Airbus, Mercedes-Benz and Novo Nordisk, if all the details hold. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz welcomed the deal, saying it averted a trade conflict that would have hit Germany's export-driven economy and its large auto sector hard. German carmakers, VW, Mercedes and BMW were some of the hardest hit by the 27.5 percent US tariff on car and parts imports now in place. The baseline 15 percent tariff will still be seen by many in Europe as too high, compared with Europe's initial hopes to secure a zero-for-zero tariff deal. Bernd Lange, the German Social Democrat who heads the European Parliament's trade committee, said the tariffs were imbalanced and the hefty EU investment earmarked for the US would likely come at the bloc's own expense. Trump retains the ability to increase the tariffs in the future if European countries do not live up to their investment commitments, a senior US administration official told reporters on Sunday evening. The euro rose around 0.2 percent against the dollar, sterling and yen within an hour of the deal's being announced. Carsten Nickel, deputy director of research at Teneo, said Sunday's accord was "merely a high-level, political agreement" that could not replace a carefully hammered out trade deal: "This, in turn, creates the risk of different interpretations along the way, as seen immediately after the conclusion of the US-Japan deal." While the tariff applies to most goods, including semiconductors and pharmaceuticals, there are exceptions. The US will keep in place a 50 percent tariff on steel and aluminum. Von der Leyen suggested the tariff could be replaced with a quota system; a senior administration official said EU leaders had asked that the two sides continue to talk about the issue. Von der Leyen said there would be no tariffs from either side on aircraft and aircraft parts, certain chemicals, certain generic drugs, semiconductor equipment, some agricultural products, natural resources and critical raw materials. "We will keep working to add more products to this list," von der Leyen said, adding that spirits were still under discussion. A US official said the tariff rate on commercial aircraft would remain at zero for now, and the parties would decide together what to do after a US review is completed, adding there is a "reasonably good chance" they could agree to a lower tariff than 15 percent. No timing was given for when that probe would be completed. The deal will be sold as a triumph for Trump, who is seeking to reorder the global economy and reduce decades-old US trade deficits, and has already reached similar framework accords with Britain, Japan, Indonesia and Vietnam, although his administration has not hit its goal of "90 deals in 90 days." US officials said the EU had agreed to lower non-tariff barriers for automobiles and some agricultural products, though EU officials suggested the details of those standards were still under discussion. "Remember, their economy is $20 trillion ... they are five times bigger than Japan," a senior US official told reporters during a briefing. "So the opportunity of opening their market is enormous for our farmers, our fishermen, our ranchers, all our industrial products, all our businesses." Trump has periodically railed against the EU, saying it was "formed to screw the United States" on trade. He has fumed for years about the US merchandise trade deficit with the EU, which in 2024 reached $235 billion, according to US Census Bureau data.
![[Lee Kyong-hee] Fake news, false reports, conspiracy theories](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwimg.heraldcorp.com%2Fnews%2Fcms%2F2025%2F07%2F27%2Fnews-p.v1.20250727.a91a4cf0574d4e6ca5224ba02614b75f_T1.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
Korea Herald
9 hours ago
- Korea Herald
[Lee Kyong-hee] Fake news, false reports, conspiracy theories
Within hours after President Yoon Suk Yeol declared martial law on Dec. 3, a rabid right-wing YouTuber contended that 99 Chinese spies were apprehended at an election management facility and transported to a US military base in Okinawa, Japan. Thereafter, social networks were rife with rumors that the Chinese accounted for 30 percent of anti-Yoon protesters demanding his impeachment. Nonsensical online demagoguery? Of course. But to many supporters of the disgraced YouTube-addicted former president, it rang true. After all, during his turbulent presidency, Yoon often blamed Chinese influence on domestic politics and elections without providing evidence. The Yoon supporters eventually descended on an enclave of lamb skewer restaurants mostly run by ethnic Koreans who left China for their ancestral homeland in search of better opportunities. Screams of 'Go back to China!' and 'Commies, disappear quickly from the Republic of Korea!' filled the air near Konkuk University, eastern Seoul. The pathetic scene of violence evoked a sense of deja vu. Rewind to July 1931, when Japan hyped a minor dispute between local Chinese farmers and Korean settlers in Manchuria to justify its aggression. The dispute began when a group of Koreans subleased land outside of Wanpaoshan village, north of Changchun, Jilin province, and began digging an irrigation ditch in an area not included in the sublease. Some 400 Chinese farmers, armed with farming tools, confronted the Koreans, and the Japanese consulate in Changchun dispatched police under the pretext of protecting subjects of their empire. The Chinese security authorities also sent police. The clash ended with several Chinese wounded, but Japanese police officers and Korean farmers unharmed. To ignite anti-Chinese sentiment, the Japanese colonial authorities had Korean newspapers publish fabricated reports claiming that hundreds of Koreans were killed during the so-called 'Wanpaoshan Incident.' Anti-Chinese riots erupted across Korea, causing hundreds of Chinese casualties and major property damage. Meanwhile, anti-Korean riots in China continued under Japan's wartime propaganda. Months later, a New York Times dispatch from Changchun dated Nov. 4 said: 'Fully 10,000 Korean farmers have been massacred by Chinese or slain while defending their homesteads during the last six weeks in Jilin Province alone, according to an estimate given out here today by a Japanese General commanding a division of 5,500 troops.' The media manipulation thus turned a minor skirmish between farming groups into a major conflict, devastating an ethnic community and eventually dealing a fatal blow to Korean independence movements in the broader Manchurian region. Fast forward to chaotic post-liberation Korea in 1945. Freed at last from four decades of harsh foreign rule, Koreans failed to achieve national unity and fell victim to great power politics. Again, newspapers played a role -- significant, if not decisive -- in the partition of the peninsula under two contesting regimes. In the summer of 1945, Koreans expected their country would quickly become free and independent again. They were not aware that the big powers, under US initiative, were considering a four-power trusteeship that might last as long as 40 to 50 years. The trusteeship issue was resolved by the foreign ministers of the US, the UK and the Soviet Union, who convened in Moscow in December 1945. Their communique, adopting the Soviet draft concerning the Korean question, stipulated a four-power trusteeship for up to five years to supervise a unified provisional Korean government, which would be established by a US-Soviet joint commission. On Christmas Day, before the announcement of the final decision, the United Press reported from Washington that 'Secretary of State Byrns went to Russia reportedly with instructions to urge immediate independence as opposed to the Russian thesis of trusteeship.' Korean media carried the story on Dec. 27, each editing and compiling it as they saw fit. The news bombarded the already polarized political scene. The idea of 'trusteeship' itself was unacceptable; anti-trusteeship became a strong rallying point for the right. The rightist Dong-A Ilbo had an inflammatory headline: 'Soviet Union Asserts Trusteeship; United States Asserts Immediate Independence.' The rightists seized upon the opportunity to denounce communists as 'country-selling Soviet stooges.' The US Military Government in Korea added to the confusion by deliberately implying that trusteeship was solely a Soviet policy. Amid extreme confrontation between the right and the left, leading politicians from both camps were assassinated. The turmoil ever deepened. The North-South division perpetuated. Much about the controversial newspaper reports on the Moscow conference, regarded as among the worst Korean press performances to date, remains a mystery. None of the newspapers offered an apology for false reporting, disregarding the basic principles of fact-checking and verification, nor did they elucidate the background of their reporting. Most recently, the press coverage of the visit by Morse Tan, a Korean American law professor and former US ambassador-at-large for global criminal justice, raises questions about his identity as well as evidence of his claims about election fraud in South Korea and President Lee Jae-myung's childhood. The press should focus more on fact-finding to enhance accountability and win back the public's trust, which has been lost to social media. Today's information disorder and consequent conundrum, complicated by the proliferation of new media and the ever-present foreign interference, requires unwavering journalistic integrity and professionalism. News consumers also need to improve their information literacy. Ultimately, they get the media they deserve.
Korea Herald
a day ago
- Korea Herald
Macron goes alone on Palestine recognition
PARIS (Reuters) -- President Emmanuel Macron's announcement that France would become the first Western member of the UN Security Council to recognize a Palestinian state in September has caused diplomatic ructions from the Middle East through Europe to Washington. But it did not come out of the blue. When Macron visited the Egyptian town of Arish on the border with Gaza in April, he was struck by the mounting humanitarian crisis and made clear on his return home that Paris would soon opt for recognition. Working with Saudi Arabia, Macron came up with a plan to have France plus G7 allies Britain and Canada recognize Palestinian statehood, while pushing Arab states to adopt a softer stance toward Israel through a UN conference. But despite weeks of talks he failed to get others on board. Three diplomats said London did not want to face the wrath of the US, and Ottawa took a similar stance, leaving Macron to go it alone. "It became increasingly apparent that we could not wait to get partners on board," said a French diplomat, adding France will work to get more states on board ahead of conference on a two-state solution in September. Domestically Macron was under rising pressure to do something amid widespread anger at the harrowing images coming out of Gaza. Although with both Europe's biggest Muslim and Jewish communities and a polarized political landscape, there was no obvious course of action that would satisfy all sides. Israel and its staunch supporter the US have blasted France's move, branding it a reward for the Palestinian militant group Hamas, which ran Gaza and whose attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023 triggered the current war. Macron had discussed the matter extensively with both Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in advance. Trump said on Friday that France's decision didn't "carry any weight" but added Macron was "a good guy." French officials previously considered an announcement at a conference scheduled for June at the UN, co-hosted by France and Saudi Arabia, to sketch out a roadmap to a viable Palestinian state while also ensuring Israel's security. But the conference was postponed amid intense US diplomatic pressure and after Israeli airstrikes on Iran. Macron's announcement on Thursday is linked to a rescheduled and rejigged version of the UN conference, now planned to take place Monday and Tuesday. That meeting will be at ministerial level, but Paris decided it would hold a second event with heads of state and government on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in September, where Macron will announce formal recognition. Some analysts say Macron has used the carrot of recognition to extract concessions from Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority which is a moderate rival to Hamas, and other regional players. "Macron here is acting as a catalyst to get the Palestinians to deliver on the needed reforms, to get the Arabs to deliver on a stabilization force and the disarming of Hamas," said Rym Momtaz, editor-in-chief of the Strategic Europe blog run by the Carnegie Europe think tank. Others say while recognition has symbolic value, there will still be no functioning Palestinian state whenever the war in Gaza comes to an end. "Recognition by a European heavyweight like France is indicative of the rising frustration with Israel's intransigent policies," said Amjad Iraqi, senior analyst at International Crisis Group. "What's the point of recognizing a state if they're doing little to stop it from turning into ruins?" French officials point to months of intense Israeli lobbying to try to prevent Macron's move -- and Netanyahu's fierce criticism of it -- as evidence that it matters a lot to Israeli leaders. Sources familiar with the matter say Israel's warnings to France had ranged from scaling back intelligence-sharing to complicating Paris' regional initiatives -- even hinting at possible annexation of parts of the West Bank. But French officials concluded that Netanyahu would do whatever he thought was in his interests in the West Bank anyway, regardless of what France did on recognition. Israel's parliament voted on Wednesday in favor of a non-binding declaration urging the government to apply Israeli law to the West Bank, widely seen as a de facto annexation of the territory. That added to the urgency in Paris. "If there is a moment in history to recognize a Palestinian state, even if it's just symbolic, then I would say that moment has probably come," said a senior French official.
