I've cut & pasted this from my post in another thread, to save a bunch of typing.
 
My sources tell me that a blanket award to all Allied internees in punishment camps will be unlikely because not every American in the punishment camps was considered "interned" -- some were considered criminals for violations of Swiss laws, as well as for violasting conditions of parole to which internees were expected to comply as a condition of continuing internship in Switzerland.
 
Some internees have indeed successfully petitioned to have DoD amend their DD Form 214 to reflect that he was a POW instead of an internee. For an internee to have his DD Form 214 amended, the appellant must present substantive relevant evidence to demonstrate:

• the existence of error or injustice
  
• that he adhered to the conditions of parole
  
• that commited no infractions of Swiss law.

Evidence of generalized personal sacrifice which an applicant endured in the service for his country is not a basis for automatic status change and result in a revision of DD Form 214.
 
There were approximately 1,500 American airmen interned in Switzerland during WW II. An Allied combatant who escaped to Switzerland was classified an "internee" if .....

• he accepted parole status,
• continued to follow the rules of parole,
• and obeyed Swiss laws while paroled.

Otherwise, they were classified the same as what we would consider undocumented illegal aliens: "non-citizens entering Switzerland without securing authorization."
 
There were between 200-300 American internees "apprehended during the act of attempted to escape." This violated the terms of parole and internment.
 
Switzerland maintained "punishment camps" for non-military criminals, and non-residents who broke Swiss law, including any Allied combatants who had been stripped of internee status for:

• violating terms of parole and internment, including (but not limited to) trying to escape or encouraging/aiding others to violate the terms of internment.
  
• Breaking Swiss criminal laws (drunk/disorderly, assault, rape, theft, destruction of property, etc. which also violated their terms of parole. )

CPT(VT) W.P. Sullivan
HQ Company - Asst G-3
Camp Johnson, VT

___‹(•¿•)›____
Kilroy was here

I contacted a former colleague of mine who lives north of Geneva. Claude-Phillippe (C-P) is a historian, a retired archivist for the Swiss National Archives in Bern and Zurich. Origionally, I called over the phone to determine if the notoriouly-meticulous Swiss had any records of individual internees and ex-internee prisoners assigned to Swiss punishment camps.
 
Yes, they have some records, but in C-P' s opinion, none would establish that those stripped of internee status were anything more than criminals.
 
C-P's version of the story is that American and British internees who tried to escape the country - thus violated parole - posed a threat to Nazi perception of Swiss national neutrality. So, Allied airmen who were caught in the act of escaping -- or implicated in assisting with planning for escapes -- were stripped of internee status and were integrated into the work camps over the course of the war.
 
As mentioned in a post above in wonderful detail, BG Barnwell Legge was the American military attaché, a retired US Army officer who was living in Switzerland when the war broke out. The Swiss National Archives contain his letters of protest of Swiss treatment of allied personnel in punishment camps. The meticulous Swiss National Archives contain copies of Legge's official complaints to the Swiss Government in Bern. The archives show that the Swiss government responded: internees who patiently awaited repatriation could be expect to be treated reasonably well, but those who broke parole or practiced "hooliganism" were to be criminals, stripped of internee status.
 
The Swiss Archives contain historical documents of a second category of unacceptable behavior by Allied internees. In fact, it brought a new word to both German-Swiss and French-Swiss languages: "hooliganism."

Bill: To this day, we Swiss tend to be very conservatif and orderly on our affairs and behaviour. The archived reports indicate that canton and national representative were concerned by public behaviour by Allied internees,

There was a split between citizenry's general sense of what behaviour was expected from guests en parole and the behaviour of some internees who used the streets of out towns as their playground for wild and woollie cowboy behaviour. Even if that poor bahaviour was committed by a swiss citizem, this would be considered be coarse, disorderly, crude, salacious, vulgar and <<detrimental to the moral fabric of the confederation.>> It was an affront to the town official and police of the time to be expected to cope with it, and demonstrated a lack of appreciation for swiss hospitality,

The archives contain several documents illustrating what the locals considered hooliganism but Allied soldiers considered << boys being boys>> ,  <<just having a little fun.>> One document from a canton official to General Legge stating that what some Americans obviously did not understand a common proverb in Swtizerland: Das problem mit mühe ist, die anfing als wenig spaß ist and Le problème avec l'ennui est qui est a commencé comme peu d'amusement.  <<The trouble with trouble is that it began as just a little fun.>>

In response, Legge officially ordered the internees not to escape and to wait for repatriation, and to comply with the terms of parole in order to placate the Swiss authorities.
 
But at the same time, he was also helping to smuggle high-value airmen out of the country.That put him in a tenuous position with Bern (who was aware of his actions.) C-P know of informal letters to Legge that if he could not secure cooperation of internees, then two things would happen: all internees would be restricted to the stricter conditions in guarded camps, and he (BG Legge) would be expelled from Switzerland for collaborating and aiding in the escape of internees in violation of the terms of parole.

CPT(VT) W.P. Sullivan
HQ Company - Asst G-3
Camp Johnson, VT

___‹(•¿•)›____
Kilroy was here

Just curious.  Besides receiving a POW medal, what other benefits would the "POW" and/or their family receive from the government for compensation?  If they only receive the medal, what is the big deal why the government wouldn't approve the issuance of the medal.

Dave Sandruck, USAF Ret
Nephew of Irvin Wentz, KIA 9 Dec 1944
99 BG, 347 BS
Tortorella (Foggia), Italy

Dave,
I think Robersable is more qualified to give you an intellegent answer versus myself. Somewhere in the deep recesses of the gray matter of my brain I seem to remember that all POWs were compensated for the years served in a POW camp. I think, ( note, I use this word loosely and frequently ) that it may have pertained to their monthly pay while interned. They received back pay for all months in interment. 

Fair Winds and following seas.
John, (GM 3/C USS Frost DE 144)

Kin to LT. John W. Farnkopf
15th AAF, 52 FG, 4th FS; Madna, Italy
MIA 11/11/44 remains found 12/8/53

sandruckd,

Just curious. Besides receiving a POW medal, what other benefits would the "POW" and/or their family receive from the government for compensation? If they only receive the medal, what is the big deal why the government wouldn't approve the issuance of the medal.

Obviously, there are at least two branches of the goverment that view the member of the military held by force.  The military, and the Veterans Administration. 

Both views are separate, and have no bearing on the other.

The reason they deny the POW medal in my opinion is since 1992, a whopping 16 years there are different people sitting behind a desk that interpret the guidelines opposite than Secretaries of the Air Force, Navy, Admirals, and Generals.

It you would accept the approval of the POW medal in 2006 for an internee of Wauwilermoos Prison because of a Congressman in Utah, I do not have an answer.

The VA, I want to stress again has no bearing on the military, and their guidelines involving POWs and Internees.

       If interested open the complete page.
 
http://www.warms.vba.va.gov/admin21/m21_1/mr/part3/subptv/ch01/ch01_secc.doc
 





a.  Definition: Former Prisoner of War

A former prisoner of war (POW) is defined in 38 U.S.C. 101(32) as a person who, while serving in the active military, naval, or air service, was forcibly detained or interned in the line of duty by
 
·  an enemy government or its agents, or a hostile force, during a period of war, or
·  a foreign government or its agents, or a hostile force, under circumstances which the Secretary finds to have been comparable to the circumstances under which persons have generally been forcibly detained or interned by enemy governments during periods of war.
 
 
 
12.  General Information on Peacetime and Certain Wartime Former POW Status Claims, Continued

 

Capt. Sullivan,
 
Thank you for your comments and interest in this thread on the internee issue in Switzerland.  I am particularly taken with your discussion with Guillaume, the maquisard, and the idea that escapees from Switzerland and the surrounding area just complicated the lives of the various Resistance and Maquis factions that flocked to Haute-Savoie in 1943.
 
There was no doubt that things were chaotic in and around Annecy and it was difficult to tell who, if anyone, was in charge at any one moment.  Various groups often clashed for control and regrettably there was sometimes a complete break down in discipline.  The Gestapo and Vichy police units fed on this, playing one group against another, and unfortunately finding willing collaborators.
 
My father, a USAAF officer, stepped into this cauldron right after he crossed the Swiss/French border with nine other American and British compatriots on 8 January 1944, to make an authorized escape run to Barcelona.  What should have been a quick trip turned into a month long ordeal waiting in cramped quarters with little food in the village of Frangy, about 24 km NW of Annecy. 
 
Part of the problem was the timing of the planned escape.  German pressure on the local Maquis was very heavy and everyone was so suspicious of strangers that nothing could be accomplished.  The local Résistant handling my father’s group, Charles Clément Blanc, was losing control of his pipeline to Perpignan in southern France.  Blanc was a member of one of the many resistance groups operating in the area: Organisation de la Résistance Armée (l’ORA).  Complicating things were undisciplined Maquis groups looting outlying farms looking for food and arms.  This forced Blanc to relocate some of his evaders from his farm and put them in town with the famous Marguerite Avons where they were difficult to hide.
 
Real complications developed in mid January, 1944, when the Germans took over the French rail network in Vichy, in retaliation for assassination attempts on German officers.  It was shortly reopened under German control, but this
pretty much halted all clandestine movement until some alternatives could be developed.
 
Finally in early February 1944, Blanc rowed his evadees across the Rhone River and bought train tickets from a cooperative station master near Seyssel--Perhaps Mon. Guillaume or an associate?  From there, the escape group fled to Narbonne and then Perpignan.
 
While the group got through to Perpignan and eventually to Barcelona, Blanc’s luck ran out on his next trip to Perpignan on 25 February, 1944.  He, his wife, and several American evaders they were escorting, were caught by the Gestapo at the Perpignan train station.  No one could ever determine who betrayed them, but in a place like Haute-Savoie in 1943-44, there were plenty of candidates.  I have always thought the incident and tragic aftermath was one of the major reasons for General Legge’s strict policy on escapes.
 
I have not come across any papers in the National Archives that suggest that there were Savoie Maquis or CA requests to limit escapes from Switzerland, but it is certainly plausible given the political turmoil that existed there during the war and the scourge of Nazi agents the escapees attracted.
 
Again, thank you for your comments and I certainly am pleased this discussion has rekindled your interest in this area of study.
 
Regards,

Warren B. Carah

Robert,
Thank you for your reply to this unfortunate touchy issue.
 
John

Fair Winds and following seas.
John, (GM 3/C USS Frost DE 144)

Kin to LT. John W. Farnkopf
15th AAF, 52 FG, 4th FS; Madna, Italy
MIA 11/11/44 remains found 12/8/53

Your quite welcome John.
 
Robert

I reviewed the thread and only locate responses regarding internees of Switzerland held in a prison.  That is a new one for the English language...internees held in a prison. 
 
I have yet to see an opinion regarding over 200 USAAF, and USN personnel held in Siberia during WWII awarded the POW medal.
 
No matter how one views the Soviet Union during WWII...nuetral or Ally, internees were awarded the medal.
 
I believe beside the initial guideline, the key to being awarded the POW medal is the treatment experienced during captivity.  "under circumstances which the Secretary concerned finds to have been comparable to those under which persons have generally been held captive by enemy armed forces during periods of armed conflict."
 
Circumstances experienced in Siberia provided by a Colonel seem to out weigh the harshness in some enemy controlled areas. 
 
Robert

WARREN B CARAH: I have visited the village of Frangy -- we ate a hearty lunch (rotisserie chicken, bread, cheese and huge tomatoes) in a tavern fronting on the village square. It looks much as it probably did during the war.

CPT(VT) W.P. Sullivan
HQ Company - Asst G-3
Camp Johnson, VT

___‹(•¿•)›____
Kilroy was here

Capt. Sullivan,
 
Frangy was certainly not the hotbed of Resistance and related activity as was Annecy during the war, but the town hosted some of the more interesting characters in the annuals of escape and evasion.
 
Frangy was the home of Marguerite Avons and her son Serge.  Marguerite joined the Resistance in honor of her husband who died shortly after the French capitulation in 1940.  Marguerite and her son Serge worked in conjunction with Charles Clement Blanc in ferrying allied escapees from Haute-Savoie to Perpignan.
 
Blanc was an interesting character.  He was a former ski instructor who decided he was going to contribute to the allied effort by smuggling evading allied servicemen south to the safety of Spain.  Blanc went to the extent of joining Petain's youth organization "Campagnons de France," as a leader as a cover for his travels between Haute-Savoie and Perpignan.  He was also a member of Organization de la Resistance Armee, one of many patriotic resitance groups operating in Haute-Savoie.  However this was not enough for Blanc, and he eventually sold off most everything he owned to buy a small farm outside of Frangy in order to house escaping allied servicemen.  As a result, his family lived in a falling down, cramped, muddy and cold old farmhouse off the beaten track, often with a large crowd of evaders who ate everything in sight.
 
The ironic thing about all of this effort is that Blanc did not much like either Brits or Americans.  He was extraordinarily jealous of any man who came into contact with his wife, and he often took needless risks with his, his family's and his charge's safety.  He was fond of sending lots of plain language telegrams back to Frangy detailing his plans for moving hidden airmen down to Perpignan.  He somehow never thought that his poor security habits would eventually catch up to him.
 
Marguerite Avons also housed many evaders in her small apartment which overlooked the main square of Frangy.  At one time she had my father and five other evaders, plus her son, all in less than a 200 sq ft. room.  As nearly all were smokers, it appeared the place was on fire to passersby.
 
Blanc was eventually caught with his wife and several evaders at the Perpignan railroad station, but Mme. Avons somehow escaped notice although she was standing next to Blanc when he was arrested.  Mme. Avons survived the war and was highrly decorated for her efforts.
 
I became good friends with her son Serge, who was full of stories of his regular trips between Geneva and Frangy escorting evaders and securing counterfeit documents from the productive printing presses of the British Legation.
 
One of the more interesting books describing the Blanc and Avons operation in Frangy is "Road to Resistance" by George Millar (Bodey Head, London: 1979).  Millar was an escapee from the British Army who passed through Frangy just prior to my father in 1943.  His insights and descriptive talents make this older book well worth the read.
 
Regards,

Warren B. Carah

The Avon family and Blanc must have faced mixed reception from their neighbors. The French of Haute-Savoie who are contemporary to that era had mixed feelings about their neighbors who assisted Allied evaders. Many felt the presence of Allied evaders magnified Gestapo and Vichy attention down upon their villages and cost the lives of many civilians, Resistance members, ORA (Organization de la Resistance Armee) and marquisards, and complicated the operations of the Resistance.

I have encountered more than a few Swiss (private citizens and government officials) who regard the interned combatants who subsequently violated terms of internship to which they pledged as criminals, much as US residents today consider parole violators. The internees who violated "parole" are still widely considered somewhat dishonorable: "en ma parole" in French conveys "on my word of honor." In most societies, a man is only as good as his word.
 
There were approximately 1,500 Americans interned in Switzerland, and 200-300 ended up in Swiss prisons "apprehended during the act of attempted to escape,"  or encouraging/aiding others to violate the terms of internment, and for breaking other Swiss criminal laws (drunk/disorderly, assault, rape, theft, destruction of property, etc.)

In Switzerland, internees who violated "parole" were classified as illegal-alien criminals who had lost internship status. As taught in Swiss schools today, the official position of the Swiss Confederation is that there were no Allied INTERNEES in Swiss prisons, only "illegal alien" criminals whose behavior resulted in the loss of internship status. Swiss history books indicate that "turning a blind eye" to parole violation by Allied combatants could have resulted in adverse repercussions from the Third Reich.

In my previous post (above), I quoted a contemporary Swiss historian who noted that the WW II U.S. internees whose conduct violated terms of internship introduced the word "hooliganism" to Switzerland.

 There was a split between citizenry's general sense of what behaviour was expected from our guests <<en parole>> and the behaviour of some Allied internees who used the streets of our towns as their playground for wild and woollie cowboy behaviour. Even if that poor behaviour was committed by a Swiss citizen, this would be considered coarse, disorderly, crude, salacious, vulgar  <<detrimental to the moral fabric of the Confederation.>>  It was an affront to the town official and police of the time to be expected to cope with it, and demonstrated a lack of appreciation for Swiss hospitality.

CPT(VT) W.P. Sullivan
HQ Company - Asst G-3
Camp Johnson, VT

___‹(•¿•)›____
Kilroy was here

Robersabel
I have not seen the statement that being sent to
Wauwilermoos Prison for punishment after being
apprehended in the attempt to escape was in violation
of Article 56 of the Geneva Convention, dated 1929.

"In no case may prisoners of war be transferred to
penitentiary establishments (prisons, penitentiaries,
convict prisons, etc.) there to undergo disciplinary
punishment.   
The quarters in which they undergo disciplinary punishment
shall conform to sanitary requirements.
Prisoners punished shall be enabled to keep themselves in a
state of cleanliness. 
These prisoners shall every day be allowed to exercise or to stay in the open air at least two hours."

Robert

Internees do not fall under the auspices of The Geneva Convention, but rather the Hague Conferences.

Delegations from Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, and the United States met at The Hague from 11 DEC 1922 to 19 FEB 1923. The Commission wrote "The Hague Rules of Air Warfare" a highly organized, comprehensive code for control of aviation in warfare (62 articles). 

Chapter VI deals with Belligerent Duties Towards Neutral States and Neutral Duties Towards Belligerent States.

• ARTICLE XXXIX: Belligerent aircraft are bound to respect the rights of neutral Powers and to abstain within the jurisdiction of a neutral State from the commission of any act which it is the duty of that neutral State to prevent.
• ARTICLE XL: Belligerent military aircraft are forbidden to enter the jurisdiction of a neutral State.
• ARTICLE XLI: Aircraft on board vessels of war, including aircraft-carriers, shall be regarded as part of such vessels.
• ARTICLE XLII: A neutral government must use the means at its disposal to prevent the entry within its jurisdiction of belligerent military aircraft and to compel them to alight if they have entered such jurisdiction.
• A neutral government shall use the means at its disposal to intern any belligerent military aircraft which is within its jurisdiction after having alighted for any reason whatsoever, together with its crew and the passengers, if any.
• ARTICLE XLIII: The personnel of a disabled belligerent military aircraft rescued outside neutral waters and brought into the jurisdiction of a neutral State by a neutral military aircraft and there landed shall be interned.
• ARTICLE XLVI: A neutral government is bound to use the means at its disposal to prevent the departure of an aircraft the crew of which includes any member of the combatant forces of a belligerent Power.
• ARTICLE XLVIII: The action of a neutral Power in using force or other means at its disposal in the exercise of its lights or duties under these rules cannot be regarded as a hostile act.

Once in the custody of the Swiss government, air crew members (of both sides) who sought sanctuary in a non-belligerent nation were considered “internees” by the Hague Conferences: held in a non-belligerent state after seeking sanctuary, usually restricted to a specific area and often kept under guard. Unlike POW's under the Geneva Convention, internees could be punished for breaking laws of the nation of internship. Interned air crews who violated the international rules of internship (examples: attempted escape or other violation of Swiss civil laws) were stripped of "internee status" and  punished by the Swiss.

Some other Allied and Axis soldiers crossed into a non-belligerent state from a belligerent state, for which they earned the status of "evadee" - not kept in camps, and could come and go as they pleased.

The Swiss were determined to adhere strictly to the international rules governing belligerent aircraft and internees, largely because they were under constant threat of invasion by the Nazis. For a nation that professed neutrality, particularly one surrounded completely by the Axis powers like Switzerland, any hint of impartiality toward the Allies could have incurred dire consequences.

CPT(VT) W.P. Sullivan
HQ Company - Asst G-3
Camp Johnson, VT

___‹(•¿•)›____
Kilroy was here

sandruckd
Just curious.  Besides receiving a POW medal, what other benefits would the "POW" and/or their family receive from the government for compensation?  If they only receive the medal, what is the big deal why the government wouldn't approve the issuance of the medal?

 In addition to regular veterans benefits & services to which they are entitled, former American POW's are eligible for disability compensation for injuries, afflictions and diseases that can be directly traced back to incarceration as a POW, not just the traditional "service-connected" disabilities.

These POW benefits include annual disability checks ranging from $1,344.00 to $28,716.00 (tax free), training and educational benefits, vocational rehabilitation and employment services, home equity guaranty, insurance, and burial benefits according to degree of disability.

Even if their illness has not been officially-associated with their incarceration, former American POW's are eligible for medical care in VA hospitals, exempt from making means test co-payments for inpatient and outpatient medical care and medications. But for extended care, they have the same co-pay rules as other veterans. They also are eligible for dental care, regardless of the length of period of captivity.

The VA has already agreed to accept certain conditions/ailments that a former POX currently has "as direct effects of the incarceration." These conditions/ailments are called "presumptives."

 Unless there is evidence of some other cause, VA Disability Compensation can be paid on the basis of presumption that a disease present today is associated with the veteran's period of captivity.

For POWs detained for 30 days or more, such eligibility covers any of the following illnesses that are found at a compensable level (at least 10% disabling): avitaminosis; beriberi; chronic dysentery; cirrhosis of the liver; helminthiasis; irritable bowel syndrome and malnutrition, including associated optic atrophy.

Also covered are: pellagra and any other nutritional deficiency; peptic ulcer disease; and peripheral neuropathy, except where directly related to infectious causes.

Several categories of diseases are presumptively associated with captivity without any 30-day limit: psychosis; any anxiety state; dysthymic disorders; cold injury; post-traumatic arthritis; strokes; and common heart diseases.

 If the former POW is rated 100% disabled, a surviving spouse will continue to receive these benefits (but at a reduced rate) after the former POW passes on. 

Veterans rated as 30% or more qualify for additional dependent benefits, based upon the number of dependents. Dependents may qualify (on a pro-rated scale) for educational assistance, health care, death pension, home loan guaranty, and burial in a national cemetary.

While spouses of veterans who die as a result of service-connected disabilities are eligible for dependency and indemnity compensation, spouses of former POWs who were rated 100% disabled and who died of a condition unrelated to their service also may be eligible. Those non-service-connected deaths prior to October 1999 are covered if the former POW had been 100% disabled for at least 10 years. More recent non-service-connected deaths are now covered under a recent law that provides the benefit when the former POWs was 100% disabled for a year or more.

The American Ex-Prisoners of War organization ( www.axpow.org ) helps former POW's present information to the VA to ensure the former POW receives the full amount legally entitled to receive, based on current medical condition. As with most government forms it is usually not "what you say" but rather "how you say it" that will determine how much the former POW and dependents qualify for.

CPT(VT) W.P. Sullivan
HQ Company - Asst G-3
Camp Johnson, VT

___‹(•¿•)›____
Kilroy was here