Ronen Steinke is a lawyer and a political journalist with Süddeutsche Zeitung.

This emphasis on political interests and motives is convincing, and it is important in order to help us put a rather idealistic and idealising view on international criminal justice into perspective. (translation from original)

• Introduction 1 The Politics of 'Historical Truth': An Outline 1. 'Historical Truth' as a Goal and a Problem 2. Extreme Selectivity and Slices of Truth 3. The Need for Representative Case Selections4. Are Objective Selections Possible? The Gravity Test 5. The Critical Systemic Role of the Prosecutor 6. Checks on the Prosecutor? The 'Accountability v Independence' Debate 7. Conclusion 2 German Objections to the Nuremberg Trials after 1949 1. The Allies in Control 2. Allied Priorities: Shaping the Historical Narrative 3. Germany and the nullum crimen Debate 4. Germany and the tu quoque Debate 5. Germany's Opposition to New Tribunals 56. Conclusion 3 Germany's Own GDR Trials after 1989 1. West Germany in Control 2. West German Narrative Interests 3. The U-Turn on nullum crimen 4. Conclusion 4 German Support for the UN Ad Hoc Tribunals in the 1990s 1. The UN Security Council in Control 2. Germany's Narrative Interests on the Balkans 3. Western Priorities: Shaping the Historical Narrative 814. Germany's Interests in New Tribunals 5. Conclusion 5 Germany's Role (and Stake) in the Creation of the ICC 1. Who Should Be in Control? 2. Originally, Germany Favoured UN Security Council Control 3. Then, Germany Argues for 'Independence' Instead 4. Remarkably, Idealist and Realists in Germany had Joined Hands 5. German Realists had Nothing to Lose from the Shift Towards Independence 6. More Importantly However, They had a Lot to Gain 7. Independence and the Crime of Aggression 8. Conclusion 16 Cosmopolitan Ideals and National Interests: Concluding Remarks

Ronen Steinke is a lawyer and a political journalist with Süddeutsche Zeitung.

This emphasis on political interests and motives is convincing, and it is important in order to help us put a rather idealistic and idealising view on international criminal justice into perspective. (translation from original)

• Introduction 1 The Politics of 'Historical Truth': An Outline 1. 'Historical Truth' as a Goal and a Problem 2. Extreme Selectivity and Slices of Truth 3. The Need for Representative Case Selections4. Are Objective Selections Possible? The Gravity Test 5. The Critical Systemic Role of the Prosecutor 6. Checks on the Prosecutor? The 'Accountability v Independence' Debate 7. Conclusion 2 German Objections to the Nuremberg Trials after 1949 1. The Allies in Control 2. Allied Priorities: Shaping the Historical Narrative 3. Germany and the nullum crimen Debate 4. Germany and the tu quoque Debate 5. Germany's Opposition to New Tribunals 56. Conclusion 3 Germany's Own GDR Trials after 1989 1. West Germany in Control 2. West German Narrative Interests 3. The U-Turn on nullum crimen 4. Conclusion 4 German Support for the UN Ad Hoc Tribunals in the 1990s 1. The UN Security Council in Control 2. Germany's Narrative Interests on the Balkans 3. Western Priorities: Shaping the Historical Narrative 814. Germany's Interests in New Tribunals 5. Conclusion 5 Germany's Role (and Stake) in the Creation of the ICC 1. Who Should Be in Control? 2. Originally, Germany Favoured UN Security Council Control 3. Then, Germany Argues for 'Independence' Instead 4. Remarkably, Idealist and Realists in Germany had Joined Hands 5. German Realists had Nothing to Lose from the Shift Towards Independence 6. More Importantly However, They had a Lot to Gain 7. Independence and the Crime of Aggression 8. Conclusion 16 Cosmopolitan Ideals and National Interests: Concluding Remarks