A. The deputy was in that case the commanding general when I was on leave. He was the responsible commanding divisional officer as I would have been.
Q. Who is responsible for the period of leave for events occurring within the area of your corps inasmuch as the corps can be made responsible at all?
A. The competent deputy but only for the corps to whom he can issue orders, exclusive of police, exclusive of Croats or any other authorities.
Q. Then on cross examination the army order was discussed of 15 September 1943. In how far did this amount to a special regulation for Croatian conditions?
A. It was entirely different from anywhere else, any other theaters of war, but there we were dealing with a sovereign and friendly state. That entails entirely different conditions.
Q. Did the German Wehrmacht in Croatia have the right to interfere with the sovereignity of this independent state?
A. No, we did not have that right.
Q. Did the Wehrmacht in Croatia have the right to arrest Croatian citizens without further ado?
A. That was the right of the sovereign state of Croatia only.
Q. Now, if something of that sort was to be carried out what conditions had to be fulfilled first?
A. That could only be carried out after having contacted the Croat government.
Q. Now, from the wording of this order of 15 September 1943 in paragraph 5 one can see that the responsible officer can in urgent cases act independently. Can you, General, tell us whether the divisional commanders in Croatia at any time availed themselves of that possibility?
A. I think I am safe in saying with certainty that that provision was never made use of at all.
Q. The prosecution has quoted a number of daily reports, teletypes, the probative value of which may be debated, which I will do in my final plea. Let us assume, General, that certain events have taken place. Now, can you give us your comments in how far the Croatian government took part in the measures?
A. Croatian agencies, as a matter of principle, carried out these measures.
Q. Perhaps we should make a distinction between two things, the ordering of a measure and the carrying out of it.
A. I emphasized before that both the ordering and the carrying out as a rule was carried out by Croat agencies. Exceptions might have occurred but they are covered by the army order.
THE PRESIDENT: May I interrupt, please? Before we take our afternoon recess I want to call to Dr. Gawlik's attention the fact that the Tribunal has been furnished with Document Book V for Dehner and this is called to your attention so that you may make such use of at such time as you desire in the presentation of your case.
The Tribunal will be in recess at this time for fifteen minutes.
THE MARSHAL: The Court will be in recess until fifteen-fifteen.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Courtroom will please find their seats.
The Tribunal is again in session.
RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION - Continued BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q. General, on cross-examination it was discussed as to what importance could be attributed to your initials on documents. It has been said that there were two possibilities: One, that you saw only the draft; and two, that you saw only the final draft. Is there not a third possibility, General, also?
A. Yes, I possibly didn't see anything at all.
Q. Can it be then that you saw neither the draft nor the final version?
A. Yes, it is possible.
Q. General, a large number of documents has been submitted here which concern the LXIXth Corps. Did this Corps order any one of the reprisal measures mentioned in these documents?
A. No, never.
Q. Did the Corps order the carrying out of one of these reprisal measures?
A. Never.
DR. GAWLIK: If it please the Tribunal, I have no further questions to put to this witness on re--direct examination, but I intend to submit a few documents.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed with the submission of your documents.
DR. GAWLIK: I am offering from Dehner Document Book II, Pages 20 to 21 of both the English and the German texts, Dehner Document No, 12, which will become Dehner Exhibit No. 16. This is an affidavit executed by Helmut Lother.
The affidavit is dated the 4th of October 1947. The affiant Lother makes certain statements in this affidavit concerning the political and religious attitude shown by General Dehner. In the first paragraph he makes statements concerning the fact that he has the necessary knowledge to make such statements, and he states:
"I was a member of the staff of the 106th Infantry Division from the time of its formation until 31 October 1943, as an official with the rank of an officer. In this capacity I had the opportunity to get thoroughly acquainted, with General DEHNER.
I often discussed in a small circle of friends with General DEHNER seriously and in detail political and religious problems. On these occasions he was never afraid to criticize party measures openly and severely, even, and in particular, before officers of his staff who, as fanatical party members, believed to have to welcome, justify and defend each measures. General DEHNER opposed in particular the attitude of National--Socialism towards the church, and this not only with words in a small circle, but also with deedy before the entire division."
I shall skip the next paragraph; and the affiant goes on to say:
"In particular I have a vivid recollection of his manly opposition against party-inspired measures of the Army Command, aiming at the suppression and elimination of the spiritual welfare within the sphere of his division."
The next document I shall submit from Dehner Document Book III, from Pages 25 and 26 of both the German and the English texts, Dehner Document No. 15, which will become Dehner Exhibit No. 17. This is an affidavit executed by one Dr. Bruno Seuser, dated the 6th of November 1947.
Seuser was Chief Physician of the German hospital at Vinkovci, in Croatia. This can be seen from the first paragraph, where the affiant says:
"From the middle of December 1943 up to March 1944, I was Chief Medical Officer of the German hospital at Vinkovci, in Croatia. General Dehner was, at that time, Corps Commander at Vukovar. For this time, and for the area of the LXIXth Reserve Corps, which was under the command of General Dehner, I can testify as follows:"
I have submitted this affidavit as evidence for - at least as far as General Dehner's Corps was concerned, the German troops in Croatia did not appear as enemies and suppressors of the Croatian population, but that instead they did everything to help the Croatian population and to support them. This becomes apparent in detail from this affidavit, particularly so it becomes apparent how the installations--the German military administration installations--like medical installations etc. in Croatia were put at the disposal of the Croatian population.
I shall further offer from Dehner Document Book IV, Page 52 of both the German and the English texts. This is document No 18 and it will become Dehner Exhibit No. 18. It is a copy of an excerpt from Prosecution Document NOKW-048, Exhibit No. 357.
I further offer from the same Document Book, Dehner Document No. 19, which will become Dehner Exhibit No. 19. This is a copy of an excerpt from the Prosecution Document NOKW-049, Exhibit No. 356.
I further submit from the same Document Book, Dehner Document No. 20, which becomes Dehner Exhibit No. 20. This is a copy of an excerpt from Prosecution Document NOKW-052, Exhibit No. 335. The page number is 54 in Dehner Document Book IV.
I further submit from the same Document Book Dehner Document No. 21, on Page 55 of Dehner Document Book IV, of both the German and the English texts. This will become Dehner Exhibit No. 21.
I further offer,-if I may add something to the last document mentioned--this is a copy of an excerpt from Prosecution Document NOKW-073, Exhibit No. 373.
I further offer from the same Document Book, Dehner Document No. 22, on Pages 56 to 61 of both the German and the English texts. This will become Dehner Exhibit No. 22.
I further submit from the same Document Book, Dehner Document No. 23, on Pages 62 to 64 of Dehner Document Book IV. This will become Dehner Exhibit No. 23. This is a copy of an excerpt from the Prosecution Document NOKW-079, Exhibit No. 350.
I further offer from the same Document Book, Dehner Document No. 24, from Dehner Document Book IV, Pages 65 and 66. This will become Dehner Exhibit No. 24. This is a copy of excerpts from a document of the Prosecution, NOKW-1758, Exhibit No. 549.
I further submit from the same Document Book, Dehner Document No. 25, on Page 67 of both the English and the German texts. This will become Dehner Exhibit No. 25. This is a copy of excerpts from Prosecution Document NOKW-073, Exhibit No. 373.
Concerning these documents contained in Dehner Document Book IV, Dehner Exhibit No. 18 to No. 25, I would like to state the following: I have submitted these excerpts because they were offered by the Prosecution without being contained in the document book of the Prosecution, although these are excerpts of extreme importance. Only the knowledge of these excerpts gives a clear and complete picture.
Because these excerpts contain a large number of reports concerning a larger number of surprise attacks which were carried out by band groups and directed against the Croatian population, against the police, and against the German Armed Forces. Only after having rend the documents in their entirety--at least to the extent to which we have it available--we can get a correct picture of the situation which, in turn, shows, as I am trying to prove, that there can be no mention of the fact that a reprisal measure followed every attack by the partisans which was carried out in Croatia. Instead it was only a very small percentage of these surprise attacks which were retaliated.
This brings me to the presentation of documents contained in Dehner Document Book V. From this Document Book I, first of all, submit Dehner Document No. 30. It is contained on Pages 83 to 84, in Dehner Document Book V, and it will become Dehner Exhibit No. 26. This document is an excerpt from the "Frankfurther Zeitung." The excerpts is dated the 18th of April 1941, and I am submitting this exhibit in order to prove that Croatia was an independent state, with its own sovereign government. It becomes apparent from this document that the government was organized in a certain way, and it also becomes apparent, who the members of the Croatian Government were.
I further offer from Dehner Document Book V, Dehner Document No. 27, which will become Dehner Exhibit No. 27, on Page 73 to 77 of both the German and the English texts. This is an affidavit by Hans Harald von Selchow. The affidavit was executed on the 5th of September 1947. von Selchow was "from 1 October 1943 until April 1945 Chief of Staff with the German Plenipotentiary for Croatia." His last military rank was Colonel of the reserve. His statements, therefore, refer to that particular period of time when General Dehner was Commander of the LXIXth Reserve Corps.
The affiant comments, first, on the question of whether Croatia was a sovereign state and regarded as such by Germany, or whether it was supposed to have been regarded as an occupied enemy territory, and in answer he says under (1) "Croatia was not regarded by Germany as an occupied enemy country, but as a sovereign state in alliance with Germany." Under (2) he gives more detailed reasons, and he says: "Croatia had her own independent government, exercising power of authority in this territory. At the head of Croatia there was a Chief of State, Dr. Pavelitsch. At the side of this Head of State there was a Croatian Government." He further goes on to say: "The german military commands and the Reich offices, existing in Croatia, did not exercise executive powers. The German forces needed for all measures they might have taken, the consent of the Croatian Government. This applied, for example, to the requisitioning of buildings for purposes of the Wehrmacht. I remember, for example, that the Commander in Chief Southeast received an allocation of quarters only after consent had been given by the Croatian authorities.
The affiant goes on to say that "a number of foreign states, as Hungary, Rumania, Turkey, Bulgaria, Japan, were represented by ministers with the Croatian Government. It is possible that some more states were represented by ministers; but I cannot recollect this today. German forces were not allowed to carry out requisitionings in Croatia. The Croatian Government did not require the approval of German Army Command agencies in carrying out their administrative tasks, nor the approval of any other German office in Croatia.
MR. FULKERSEN: Before Dr. Gawlik goes any further I'd just like to ask him whether this witness is in Nurnberg now.
DR. GAWLIK: No, the witness is no longer in Nurnberg.
MR. FULKERSEN: He is not in Nurnberg now?
DR. GAWLIK: No, he's no longer here.
"There was no German military administration in existence in Croatia.
"The German plenipotentiary General in Croatia was, during the time of my membership in this office, the liaison between the individual military command agencies - Supreme Command of the Armed Forces (OKW), Army Group, Armored Army High Command 2, on the one hand, and the Croatian government on the other hand. He had not the authority ordinarily wielded by a Military Commander in an occupied country. His activities mainly consisted in submitting proposals to the Croatian government, in forwarding decisions taken by the Croatian authorities to the German command agencies, and in acting as intermediary when Croatian authorities and German command agencies had differences of opinion, and the other way round. "The Croatian State was always bent on preserving its authority and did not tolerate any interference by German agencies, above all by command agencies, in the sovereign rights of the Croatian State."
Under "3" the affiant makes statements concerning Croatia's own Armed Forces.
Figure "4" deals with the question of executive powers, and the question goes: "Did General Dehner ever have the executive power in the area of the LXIXth Reserve Corps?" And the answer is: "As far as I know, he had not. The executive power was, also in the area of the LXIXth Reserve Corps, in the whole area of the Croatian State, in the hands of the Croatian authorities."
In Figure "5" the question reads: "To whom were the police units, which were employed in Croatia, subordinated?" And the answer states: "The police units which were employed in Croatia, were under the command of area police chiefs, and these in turn under that of the Delegate of the Reichsfuehrer SS in Croatia, SS-Gruppenfuehrer Kammerhofer who was directly subordinated to Himmler. Those statements apply to the period during which I was Chief of Staff in Croatia."
Under II-6 reprisal measures are being dealt with. "Who ordered the executions of reprisal measures of Croatia?" And the answer: "The Croatian authorities. The German forces were only able to propose the imposition of reprisal measures. Such a proposition was submitted either through command channels via the corps, the 2nd Armored Army and the German Plenipotentiary General, or, in urgent cases, via the Croatian Plenipotentiaries with the Division Staffs."
"I know of not a single case in which reprisal measures would have been ordered by German agencies."
These measures apply to my period of service with the German agencies in Croatia." In paragraph 7, the affiant deals with proposals of German units to Croatian agencies. In paragraph 8, the question reads:
"Were the German command agencies entitled to impose reprisal measures without the approval of the Croatian authorities?" and the answer says "No."
Figure 9 deals with the hostages camps in Croatia, and the question says:
"Under whose command were the camps for hostages in Croatia?" and the answers says" "I know of one only. This one was under the command of the Croatian authorities, the Croatian Security Police, to be precise."
Number 10 asks: "Did the German forces in Croatia have hostage camps?" and the answer says:
"As far as I know, they had not. This I know on account of the following events:
"In Croatia it was customary to exchange hostages against captured German soldiers. To my estimate, there were, during the period from autumn 1943 until the end of the war, about 50 hostages per month in the average exchanged against German soldiers.
"Only the Croatian government was authorized to decide upon this exchange, and not the German commands. It occurred in many instances that the Croatian government did not approve the proposals made by the German commands.
"I particularly remember the case of General von Dewitz, who had been captured by the partisans. The hostages, who were exchanged, were taken from the hostage camp near Brod. This camp is, as far as I remember, the only hostage camp that existed in Croatia. This camp was not under the command of a German military agency, but under the Croatian authorities."
Roman Numeral III deals with the importance of the railway line Zagreb-Belgrade.
Number 12 deals with the responsibility for the security of this railroad line. Number 13 deals with the subordination of the inspector of the Railway Security police and the answer reads.
"The Inspector of the Railway Security Service was, as far as I know, directly under the 2nd Panzer Army."
Number 15 deals with the security of the railway lines in Croatia and number 17 deals with the consequences of an interruption of the railway line in Zagreb-Belgrade and the statement reads:
"Interruption of the railway line Zagreb-Belgrade not only threatened the security of the German forces in Croatia, but also the food supply of the population of the country."
Paragraph IV, 18, the question reads: "Were Croatian subjects conscripted for labor in Germany by the German military authorities?" And the answer says "No."
Number 19 asks about the evaluation of reports by Croatian authorities concerning the excesses by the 1st Cossack Division.
I further submit from Document Book Dehner V, Dehner Document No. 28.
THE PRESIDENT: Pardon me, just a moment. Have you completed the examination in full of General Dehner. You have, have you not? I am just wondering -
DR. GAWLIK: Yes, I have.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you wish to ask him anything about these affidavits?
DR. GAWLIK: No, I don't want to.
THE PRESIDENT: Will the prosecution wish to ask him anything -- the defendant -- about these?
MR. FULKERSON: No, I believe not, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: There being no apparent necessity for the witness to remain in the witness chair, perhaps it might be more comfortable and he will have at least congenial company if he were back in the group of his associates. You may be excused then.
(The witness was excused.)
THE PRESIDENT: Now if you will refer to the document that you had in mind when I interrupted you?
DR. GAWLIK: I submit from Dehner Document Book V document Dehner No. 28. This will become Dehner Exhibit 28. To repeat, it is Dehner Document Book V, page 78 to 81, Dehner Document V, Dehner Document 28, Dehner Exhibit 28. This is an affidavit executed by Hans Heinrich Strachwitz, and the affidavit is dated 5 December 1947. Count Hans Heinrich Strachwitz was a former officer who was a member of the Corps Staff of the LXIX Reserve Corps. Under III he makes the statements concerning the independence of the Croatian state and he says:
"Croatia was an autonomous and independent state. The executive power was in the hands of the authorities of the Croatia State.
"Within its Corps area the 69th Reserve Corps did not have the executive power.
"The rights of the Croatian State were always observed. For example, the Corps did not have the right to requisition billets without the approval of the authorities of Croatian State. No further requisitionings were permitted, even if they were for military purposes."
Under IV, the relation between the police forces and the Wehrmacht is described, namely the police units in the LXIX Reserve Corps, and it is stated that they were under the area commander and that he in turn was under the command of SS-Gruppenfuehrer Kammerhofer, who was immediately subordinated to Himmler.
"The operation Kammerhofer was an independent police operation and was not ordered by the 69th Reserve Corps." It only happened that police units were tactically subordinated to the troops of the 69th Corps for certain restricted operations.
In the next paragraph, the affiant deals with the Operation Kammerhofer and he says:
"The operation Kammerhofer was an independent police operation and was not ordered by the 69th Reserve Corps. Neither was the Corps instructed to supervise its execution. If the operation Kammerhofer had been ordered by the Corps I would have been included in this order as officer in change of the quartermaster battalion."
In paragraph V, which deals with the carrying out of reprisal measures, the affiant states:
"I have no knowledge of any reprisal measures having been implemented against the bandits by order of General Dehner. He could not have done so either, as he was not a judiciary, and as no courts martial section was included in the Corps staff."
The affiant goes on to make statements concerning the activities of the bands and particularly so about the surprise attacks along the railroad Zagreb-Belgrade and the consequences of these surprise attacks, consequences not only affecting the interests of the German Wehrmacht, but also the interests of the Croatian population.
He further goes on to say: "I also know that members of the bands when they were captured by the Germans and bandits captured in German uniform were not shot but were treated as prisoners. It was a matter of course that wounded bandits were given medical treatment.
"In the area of the 69th Reserve Corps the army had no prisoner enclosures. The prisoners from the prisoner collecting points were handed over to the Croatian police authorities."
The next paragraph deals with hostage camps and the affiant says: "I have no knowledge of the fact that the 69th Reserve Corps maintained any hostage camps."
And in the next paragraph ho says: "I can definitely state, furthermore, that the 69th Reserve Corps or the Wehrmacht units under its command did not have
a) any concentration camps
b) any collecting points for partisans
c) any labor camps.
"I can make such a definite statement, as it would have been my task to provide furnishings and supplies for these camps."
Paragraph VI deals with excesses committed by the Cossacks, and paragraph VII deals with the attitude of the German troops towards the Croatian population, which paragraph also shows that the German troops tried to help and support the Croatian population wherever they could.
I further submit from Dehner Document Book V, Dehner Document 26, which will become Dehner Exhibit 29. This is on page 68 to 72 of both the German and the English document books. This is an excerpt from the War Diary of the Corps Headquarters of the LXIX Reserve Corps covering the period from 1 January until 30 June 1944. I should like to direct the attention of the Tribunal, first of all, to page 69 of Dehner Document Book V to the entry dated 18 January 1944, which show the relation between the Corps and the Croatian police, and between the Corps and the Croatian Armed Forces.
"To a teletype of the Commander in Chief of the 2nd Panzer Army, in which the Corps Headquarters are instructed to draw attention to the part played by the police and Croatian Units at any given time in their Daily Reports and Action Reports, the Commanding General reports, while transmitting a copy of Daily Reports, that in the area of Corps Headquarters LXIX Reserve Corps the performance of those units has been estimated up to the present just in exactly the same way and reported on exactly as the German Divisions employed under his command."
Court No. V, Case No. VII.
By submitting this report, I want to show that not everything that can be found in the daily reports was carried out by German troops and that General Dehner cannot be held responsible for everything that is being reported in these reports. I further draw the attention of the Tribunal to page 71 of Dehner Document Book V where we have an entry of 3 March 1944. It says in this entry:
"Corps Headquarters replies to the Comitatus 'VUKA' re its complaint dated 12 January 44 concerning futile interference of German Armed Forces in administrative matters.
Corps Headquarters alludes to fact that German Wehrmacht quite naturally respects the sovereign rights of the independent State Croatia. Encroachments on the part of German authorities which in isolated cases are possibly the result of 'lack of knowledge of the local situation' are from time to time stopped by superior German authorities in Command...."
I submit this report as evidence that Croatia was an independent state and that the German troops in Croatia were not an occupation power in an enemy country but were regarded as members of a friendly state which stayed in that country with the consent of the Croatian government and which consulted the Croatian government in the execution of their tasks and in turn supported the Croatian government in the execution of its tasks.
This, for the moment, brings me to the end of the presentation of my documents.
If it please the Tribunal, I have not quite closed the presentation of my evidence. I hadn't realized that the cross examination of the Prosecution would be as brief as it was. I had anticipated a somewhat longer cross-examination and in consideration of the Christmas holidays I have called my witness for the fifth of January only.
In the meantime, my colleagues will continue with the presentation of their documents with the permission of the Tribunal and I would like to ask for permission of the Tribunal to examine my witnesses after the Christmas recess. I expected my examination to last somewhat longer and also thought that the cross-examination would last somewhat longer and, therefore, I only called the witness for the time after the Christmas recess.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal is in the situation where, if we were to require you to close your case, it might be punishing your client for some poor judgment on your part. We will not do that. It is to be regretted, however, that your witnesses are not here and that we cannot go ahead, but this being the Christmas season and the Court endeavoring to be influenced by the spirit that should be present at that time, we will grant you the privilege of presenting your witnesses at a later time. Don't do it again.
DR. GAWLIK: Your Honor, I may add the following, that I discussed the procedure with my colleague Laternser, and that we had worked out what time the examination would take and we consulted about, when I might have to ball my witnesses. I could not have heard all my witnesses before the Christmas recess anyway. It is a little difficult to anticipate how long examination and witnesses' examination would take and I would have to call the witnesses three weeks prior to their actual appearance.
THE PRESIDENT: We will proceed under the circumstances just so we put our time in. That is the thing that we are interested in.
Is counsel for one of the other defendants prepared to present some matters at this time?
DR. SAUTER: Dr. Sauter for the defendant von Geitner. If it please the Tribunal, in order to carry on with the proceedings and in order to avoid any delay, I would like to ask for permission to now present the remainder of my documents for the defendant von Geitner.
THE PRESIDENT: You may do so.
DR. SAUTER: We shall need, your Honors, Geitner Document Book I and II because from each one of these two document books I have one more document to present. Then following that, we shall need Geitner Document Book III. I repeat, we need Geitner Document Book I, II and following those two, Document Book IV - not Geitner Document Book III. I have read everything I had to read from Geitner Document Book III. I shall need Geitner I, II and IV today.
On Monday, if your Honors please, on Monday we shall also need Geitner Document Book V and VI. I would like to announce that now so that the document books can be prepared for the use of the Tribunal. Today we shall only need I, II, and IV. On Monday V, and VI.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, if you will kindly wait until the messenger has been able to get out books?
DR. SAUTER: Certainly, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, if I may make a further inquiry -- is it your thought and do you anticipate that you will take both Monday and Tuesday in the presentation of these document books?
DR. SAUTER: I don't believe that I shall need all of Tuesday. I believe I shall have to use all Monday. Whether I shall have to use any time on Tuesday I can't say for certain at this moment. I have consulted one of my colleagues and if I finish on Tuesday before the end of the sessions, then he in turn will submit the balance of his documents so that we can make full use of the time available to us. In other words, either I shall need all of the time on Tuesday or the balance of the time will be made use of by presenting other documents by another one of my colleagues.
THE PRESIDENT: That is the point I had in mind, as to whether or not there would be some one prepared to follow you if you did not take all the time. Now, may I inquire as to what counsel and what defendant will present the evidence?
DR. SAUTER: Dr. Rauschenbach for General Foertsch. Dr. Rauschenbach will follow me and will present the balance of his documents for General Foertsch.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
I shall start with Geitner document No. 28 on page 85 of Geitner document book 1. I repeat, Geitner document 28, page 85 in Geitner document book 1. This document will receive Geitner exhibit No. 64, that is the next available document number. The affidavit is executed by Dr. Scheller, who was assistant officer with the commanding officer in Serbia during April, 1943 to March, 1944 and he deals with the effect of reprisal measures on the insurgent movement. He says:
THE INTERPRETER: What is the English document number?
DR. SAUTER: I am afraid I do not have the English document number. It is page 28 in the German text.
THE INTERPRETER: O,K,, I have it.
MR. FULKERSON: It is on page 86, if your Honors please. It is almost illegible. If your Honors please, it is document No. 28 beginning on page 85, I am sorry.
DR. SAUTER: The affiant says concerning the effectiveness of reprisal measures on the insurgent movements:
"Within the sphere of my activity in the above described official position I had at my disposal, besides all reports of our own and allied troops, of the Military Administration Headquarters, the police etc. on the situation of the enemy and his activity, also the results of the wireless - and telephone control.
"The intercepted wireless messages of Draga Mihailovic repeatedly contained the order to subordinate commanders to stop assaults on German troops and their allies and acts of sabotage against the German and its allied army because the reprisal would exact an unnecessarily heavy sacrifice from the Serbian people. Draza Mihailovic demanded indeed intensification of the struggle against the Tito-partisans and against the "traitors of the Fatherland" - therefore against the government Hedic and its authorities, Ljotic movement etc. - also there were similar exhortations in the Draza Mihailovic paper "Ravna Gora."
"It appeared further from the radio that Draza Mihailovic was repeatedly blamed by his own government, as well as by the English, because of his insufficient activity against the German Wehrmacht; further support was often made contingent on an increase in sabotage activity.