Ever since the Simon Wiesenthal Center (SWC) announced its intention to launch "Operation: Last Chance"(O:LC) in Hungary, there has been a lively debate in the Hungarian media about the project. While the attitude of many journalists was skeptical, few were in a position to comment intelligently about the background of the project, its historical context and its probable consequences. Thus the opinions of local Holocaust historians assumed special significance and invariably it was Laszlo Karszai who was asked to comment on O: LC.

At first glance, Karszai would appear to be a natural supporter of the project, given his chosen profession of Holocaust scholar and family background, but that is clearly not the case. If anything, the professor from Szeged seems obsessed to publicize his adamant opposition. Not content with the interviews in practically every newspaper, television, and radio show, he also felt compelled to write a lengthy and particularly vicious article in Elot es Iradalom, in which he not only dismissively attacked the project, but also cynically belittled its sponsors.

To summarize his arguments, Karszai claims that the reasons I presented to justify the project are not valid in Hungary since many Hungarian Nazi war criminals were prosecuted after World War II and thus the country is not in need of such a history lesson. But even if that were not the case, Karszai claims that the prosecution of elderly defendants would serve no educational purpose and is basically an exercise in futility since such cases are impossible to prosecute so many years after the crimes. In addition, he notes that O: LC has hereto failed to produce a single trial and even the State of Israel no longer seeks to bring Nazi war criminals to justice. In short, the project is a "superfluous, harmful, and hopeless" initiative, which was launched to prove that the Wiesenthal Center in Jerusalem is worthy of financial support.

While on the surface, such arguments may appear convincing, they are based on numerous fallacies, inaccuracies and omissions which Karszai is either unaware of or simply chose to ignore. For starters, I never claimed that no organized trials of Nazi war criminals were ever held in Hungary. On the contrary, I am well aware of the fact that nearly 27,000Hungarians were convicted of war crimes after World War II. What Karszai neglects to mention is that the people's courts which tried these defendants were politically-motivated with a strong Communist influence, a fact which very much taints their credibility in the eyes of many Hungarians. (A similar problem exists in all post-Communist societies. Thus, for example, despite the fact that numerous Croatian Nazi war criminals were prosecuted in postwar Yugoslavia, the 1999 trial in Zagreb of former Jasenovac commandant Dinko Sakic-which was facilitated by our office-had a particularly powerful impact on Croatian society since it was conducted in an independent Croatia.)Under such circumstances, the prosecution of a Hungarian Nazi war criminal by democratic Hungary assumes unique significance, since unlike past trials it cannot be dismissed as politically-motivated or as Communist propaganda. The problem is, however, that the "new" democratic Hungary has hereto failed to investigate, let alone prosecute, a single such case.

As far as Karszai's claim that the prosecution of elderly defendants is an exercise in futility, the numerous convictions of Nazi war criminals achieved in recent years clearly disprove his arguments. Thus during the period from January 1,2001 until March 31,2004,twenty-seven convictions of Nazi war criminals were obtained in six different countries. In addition, from April 1,2003 until March 31,2004, 355 new investigations of Nazi war criminals were initiated in ten different countries and as of April 1,2004,there were 940 investigations of Nazi war criminals currently underway in about a dozen countries, unequivocal proof of the fact that in many countries the prosecution of Holocaust perpetrators is still considered a worthy endeavor. The fact that Israel is no longer active in this field does not corroborate Karszai's claim that such efforts are worthless. It stems primarily from the country's continuing security problems, its obvious desire not to turn into a "dumping ground" for such criminals and the understanding that such trials primarily resonate when they are held in the country in which the crime was committed.(Imagine the difference in the coverage and significance of a trial of an Arrow Cross killer in Hungary and in Israel.)

It is also important to get beyond Karszai's fallacious arguments regarding the age of the suspects and reiterate several of the SWC's cardinal principles. The first is that the passage of time in no way diminishes the culpability of the perpetrators. The fact that a criminal is able to elude justice for forty or even for fifty years does not make him or her innocent. The second is that the key element is not necessarily a person's chronological age, but rather his or her health and mental state.

Less than a month ago, we exposed the former Ustasha police chief of Slavonska Pozega in Croatia, Milivoj Asner, who at age 91 is still active in Croatian politics and not long ago founded a new political party. He is so healthy, in fact, that following our launch of O:LC in Zagreb, he went into hiding. I do not see any reason to ignore his crimes simply because he was born in 1913.
To emphasize this point, allow me to make it more personal. Imagine for a moment that the person who murdered your grandmother was suddenly found living in Hungary and he was 82 or 84 or even 86 and in good health. Every day, he went swimming, walked his dog and worked in his garden. Assuming there was credible evidence against him, is there any reason to ignore his crimes? Wouldn’t you want this person to be punished for his terrible crimes? In this context, a criminal's rank becomes irrelevant and the important principle of the responsibility of all the killers-and the inacceptability of the "superior orders" defense-is clearly demonstrated.

This brings me to another extremely important point. Karszai cynically attributes my efforts to mercenary motives, derisively referring to "self-appointed Nazi-hunters,” thereby ignoring our most basic motivation-the sense of obligation which we feel toward the victims of the Holocaust. Believe it or not, Mr. Karszai, there are some Jews, like Aryeh Rubin and myself, who strongly feel that our generation has an obligation to those murdered that a serious effort be made to bring their killers to justice. It is true that success is quite difficult to achieve and that we long ago lost the battle for complete justice, but the effort itself is worthy for two important reasons. The first is that it sends a clear message that genocidal and anti-Semitic crimes will never be ignored. The second was noted by Croatian President Stipe Mesic who last month praised O:LC because its launch would mean that Nazi war criminals "would no longer be able to sleep peacefully at night."

In that respect, I sincerely believe that Karszai's assessment of O:LC as a failure is premature. It is true that it has not produced a trial yet, but the nineteen murder investigations already initiated may result in several trials and the educational dimension of our project should not be underestimated. The public discussion and debate regarding the complicity of the local population in the crimes of the Holocaust which took place in the wake of the launching of O:LC in every country, are an important contribution to public education on the Holocaust and, ultimately, part of a process which will hopefully significantly reduce anti-Semitism.

When O:LC ends it will be easy to determine who was right, but until that time, the least I would expect from a serious Holocaust historian is a measure of respect regarding our intentions and a more accurate presentation of the contemporary situation vis-à-vis the current investigation and prosecution of Nazi war criminals all over the world.

Dr. Efraim Zuroff is the Simon Wiesenthal Center's chief Nazi-hunter and the director of its Israel office. He earned his Ph.D. in the history of the Holocaust from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.