The publication of the English translation of Wolf Gruner's The Holocaust in Bohemia and Moravia provides the English language much for which to be grateful. In addition to producing a more readable text, one can only wish that the translator and publisher had stuck closer to the original German title, Die Judenverfolgen in Böhmen and Mähren. Lokale Initiativen, zentrale Entscheidungen, jüdische Antworten (Local Initiatives, Central Decisions, and Jewish Responses) as published by Wallstein Verlag in 2016.

The latter translation, in my view, lacks some of the German original's nuance regarding the more active role initially played by the Czech authorities in the implementing of Jewish policy in the Nazi-occupied Czech lands, the so-called protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. As Gruner deftly describes, although there certainly were voices within the Czech occupation government and civil society that successfully pushed for more stringent anti-Jewish measures, they arose in a context in which local representatives of the Third Reich and, to a lesser extent, resident ethnic Germans had the upper hand. This was especially the case when it came to Aryanization of Jewish property. Although many Czechs, including former army officers, applied to become trustees of Jewish property, only a few were successful, with property going overwhelmingly to Germans (190).

Although there was no mistaking who was ultimately in charge, according to Gruner, in allowing the Czech government and state administration substantial autonomy, the Czechs shared significant power over Jewish policy with their German overlords. In his mater-of-fact way, Gruner notes later in the text how this played out in practice: “While the Germans showed more interest in finances and ‘Aryanization,’ the Czech government and its ministries, under increasing pressure from Czech fascists, began to segregate Jews in public spaces, such as businesses, restaurants and schools” (100). For their part, in various places during the early stage of the occupation, Czech fascists and ethnic Germans joined forces to perpetrate attacks on synagogues and other Jewish property. Moreover, as Gruner makes clear in his conclusion, even when deportations intensified and the German Security Service (SD) assumed a key role, the Czech ministries and local authorities continued to be active players in the persecution process (391).

Yet, as Gruner points out, at least early in the occupation, this did not mean that Czech fascist organizations, such as the National Aryan Union, faced no opposition. According to a Jewish Telegraphic Agency dispatch cited by Gruner, on June 9, 1939, the local Czech gymnastics association, Sokol, in Hradec Králové refused to let the National Aryan Union use their premises for a meeting (68). At least for a time, according to Gruner, as German repression intensified, Czech solidarity with Jews increased. This manifested itself especially after the November 1940 closure of Czech institutions of higher learning and took the form of Czechs frequenting the same pubs as Jews, as well as some Jews being involved in the Czech resistance. Based as these claims are on a few German Security Service reports, one could easily wonder just how widespread this solidarity actually was.

Where Gruner truly excels is in mapping out the overall trajectory and the intricacies of the German program of persecution and annihilation. It should come as no surprise to the students of Nazi anti-Jewish policy that improvisation, competition, and indecision characterized its genesis and implementation. Nowhere is this more evident than in the Nisko Plan. Spearheaded by Adolf Eichmann in the wake of the defeat of Poland, it began on October 18, 1939, with a series of three forced transports of Jews from Ostrava in Moravia, Vienna, and Katowice to a minimally habitable wetland area near Lublin. The intention was to establish a Jewish reservation that would serve as the beginning of a territorial solution to the Jewish Question. The project never moved beyond the experimental phase due to conflicting priorities, however, and the SS returned some of the prisoners to Austria and the protectorate, while others were relocated near the Soviet border. Despite its ostensible failure, this initial attempt at deportation should, at the very least, be seen as an indication of what the future held in store.

The eventual unrelenting nature of German persecution notwithstanding, collectively and individually Jews did as much as they could to resist the Nazi onslaught. Under increasingly difficult conditions and desperately trying to avoid becoming a tool for implementing persecution, the staff of the Jewish Religious Communities tried to prepare for and find emigration possibilities, and did all they could to ameliorate the increasing impoverishment of the population they served. In light of this, Gruner cautions us against seeing cooperation in implementing forced labor as “a step on the way to annihilation, let alone as annihilation itself” (396).

At the same time, Gruner documents the many instances of ordinary Jews doing what they could to thwart their persecution. Risking everything from fines to execution, they fled or helped others to flee forced labor camps and avoid deportation, flaunted regulations, and cooperated with non-Jewish Czechs in organized resistance. By bringing these courageous acts to light, Gruner puts the myth that Jews went meekly to their slaughter to rest.

The history of anti-Jewish persecution and the implementation of the Holocaust in the Czech lands has not been treated in as much detail before. Still, the number of times Gruner cites Livia Rothkirchen's groundbreaking The Jews of Bohemia and Moravia: Facing the Holocaust (2005) testifies to the importance of her work. Gruner's citations of Czech researchers, such as Helena Krejcová and Miroslav Kárný, show the importance of their work. The work of the Czech-Australian scholar Jan Láníček on the behavior of the Czechoslovak exile government under President Beneš is also referenced.

Despite its exhaustive and comprehensive character, we should see Gruner's study as encouraging further research. His extensive use of memoirs and video testimonies as well as government archives in the Czech Republic and Germany suggests that there is more to uncover.