Introduction 1
1 The Politics of 'Historical Truth': An Outline 8
1. 'Historical Truth' as a Goal and a Problem 9
2. Extreme Selectivity and Slices of Truth 12
3. The Need for Representative Case Selections 15
4. Are Objective Selections Possible? The Gravity Test 20
5. The Critical Systemic Role of the Prosecutor 27
6. Checks on the Prosecutor? The 'Accountability v Independence' Debate 31
7. Conclusion 37
2 German Objections to the Nuremberg Trials after 1949 40
1. The Allies in Control 41
2. Allied Priorities: Shaping the Historical Narrative 42
3. Germany and the nullum crimen Debate 47
4. Germany and the tu quoque Debate 53
5. Germany's Opposition to New Tribunals 56
6. Conclusion 59
3 Germany's Own GDR Trials after 1989 62
1. West Germany in Control 62
2. West German Narrative Interests 64
3. The U-Turn on nullum crimen 68
4. Conclusion 72
4 German Support for the UN Ad Hoc Tribunals in the 1990s 74
1. The UN Security Council in Control 75
2. Germany's Narrative Interests on the Balkans 78
3. Western Priorities: Shaping the Historical Narrative 81
4. Germany's Interests in New Tribunals 87
5. Conclusion 90
5 Germany's Role (and Stake) in the Creation of the ICC 92
1. Who Should Be in Control? 92
2. Originally, Germany Favoured UN Security Council Control 96
3. Then, Germany Argues for 'Independence' Instead 100
4. Remarkably, Idealist and Realists in Germany had Joined Hands 108
5. German Realists had Nothing to Lose from the Shift Towards Independence 110
6. More Importantly However, They had a Lot to Gain 116
7. Independence and the Crime of Aggression 119
8. Conclusion 128
6 Cosmopolitan Ideals and National Interests: Concluding Remarks 131
Bibliography 136
Index 149