Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America, against Wilhelm List, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 19 September 1947, 0930-1630; Justice Wennerstrum, presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the court room will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal V.
Military Tribunal V is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the court.
May it please Your Honors, all defendants are present in the Court room.
The persons in the court room will be seated.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter?
DR. SAUTER (for the defendant Lanz):
Your Honor, may I put a few short questions to the witness, please.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. Witness, when you were directly examined you told us that in April 1941 when the two Greek Armies capitulated, that is, the Tracian Army, the Eastern Army, - that happened on the 9th of April 1941, if I am correct, and the Epirus Army, that was the Western Army, and if I recollect properly that happened either on the 21st of 23rd of April? That is correct; isn't it?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. All right, in connection with that I am interested in the following. In view of this fact does that mean the whole Greek Army capitulated or were there any larger units of the Greek Armed Forces excepted from this surrender?
A. The capitualtion of the Thracian Army and the Epirus Army meant that the entire Creek Land Amy capitualted.
Q. If I understand you correctly you had no doubt that through this surrender its existence was discontinued?
A. There could be no doubt whatsoever about that.
Q. Did you know as the responsible German Army leader, and I repeat, did you know as responsible German Army leader, at that time, consider in any way the possibility that the fight on the part of the Greek troops would later be continued by any other organization?
MR. DENNEY: Your Honor I object to Dr. Sauter leading the witness; he can ask him what he knew, but he is putting the answer to the question.
DR. SAUTER: It was not a leading question because everybody in the court room could and must hear from the answer to the previous question what I again asked the witness in order to exclude any doubt.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed; the objection is overruled and I doubt the necessity of repeating the question.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. Witness, in connection with your previous answer I had put to you the question: Did you, as the responsible German Army leader in the Greek area, consider the possibility or the likelihood that after the surrender of the whole Greek Army the fight would be taken up again by any other kind of organization? Did you count on this possibility or likelihood?
A. I did not count on this possibility. Otherwise I would not have immediately, after the capitulation, released all Greek soldiers. Any other units did not exist in Greece.
Q. Witness, just one last question. The Greek witnesses which have been examined here described the situation as if so to speak the Greek Army had never capitulated and that the Greek Partisans were a kind of legitimate successor of the Greek Army. Do you share this opinion or is this opinion, according to your personal knowledge; incorrect?
A. That the Greek Army ceased to exist and that the surrender extended over the whole Greek land army is a fact. That can be soon from the fact that as of that day; that is the 9th of April; concerning the Thracian Army; and as of the 21st of April concerning the Epirus Army; no further fighting took place. All Greek troops as a consequence of the surrender ceased hostilities not only against us but also against the Italians and the Epirus Army surrender was carried out without any necessity of applying force on the part of the German troops or anything like that.
DR SAUTER: Your Honor; I have no further questions to put to the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any further examination on behalf of any of the other German counsel? If not; you may proceed with the cross-examination; Mr. Denney.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. DENNEY:
Q. You told us about the Munich Putsch attempt in 1923. Just what was your connection with that event?
A. With my battalion that was stationed in Kempten and in Lindau I was alerted during the night; transported by rail to Munich during the night and there I was employed for the maintainance of security.
Q. For whom wore you acting in that affair?
A. For the Kahr Government of that day in Munich.
Q. And who were you opposing?
A. Hitler and the National Socialist party.
Q. Do you know what they were trying to do?
A. Who?
Q. Hitler and his National Socialists.
A. They had tried to overthrow the Kahr government.
Q. Then were you successful in your efforts?
A. Yes.
Q. Some time later I believe you told us you had to flee because of what happened there.
A. That must be an error.
Q. Perhaps you can straighten it out for me then. What happened after that?
A. May I explain that the fleeing may be connected with the statement that I said on the occasion of the Raete Putsch and the establishment of the Spartacist rule I had to flee from Munich; that was in the year 1918.
Q. I see; thank you. Then you were on duty at the Infantry School about 1930. Is that right?
A. Spring 1930.
Q. And there you noticed some attempts on the part of the National Socialists to influence the young officers?
A. The influencing of the young officers had taken place already prior to that in various and individual troop units.
I was given the instructions and the task to prevent that such attempts would he carried out in the Infantry School.
Q. And you did everything you could to prevent the ideas of National Socialism from being conveyed to the young officers of the Infantry School?
A. I could not prevent that these ideas were communicated to these young people because they were very free with their connections on the outside but in any case I tried to prevent that it had any effect in the school itself and also on the thoughts and ideas of. these young officers.
Q. You wanted to be sure so far as the instruction went that the school was restricted purely to military matters and didn't get involved in the Party idealogy?
A. Yes, one can express it like that.
Q. And you were successful in your efforts?
A. Yes.
Q. And when the Hitler government came to power because, you have stated, that they were duly elected, you saw no reason to discontinue your position in the Army?
A. No, I saw no cause to do that.
Q. Then, you recall that early in 1940 I believe it was you had a talk with Brauchitsch with reference to the possibility of further military action in the West?
A. Yes.
Q. Who was Brauchitsch?
A. Brauchitsch was the Commander in Chief of the Army.
Q. And he at that time was a Field Marshall?
A. He was at that time a full General, (Generaloberst).
Q. And what was your rank then?
A. I was also a full general (Generaloberst.)
Q. And you made a memorandum as a result of your talk with Brauchitsch which you forwarded to Hitler?
A. May I put that right?
Q. Certainly.
A. I had written out a memorandum purely for my own personal use that was very brief ideas of mine which I put down just for my own personal use. Then Brauchitsch came on a visit to see me and he talked to me about these operations which were in consideration and asked me about my own opinion. And on this occasion I told him I had put them down in a brief form and I informed him about the main contents of this memorandum. Then he said I should put these very same ideas to Hitler if at any time I had the opportunity to do that.
Q. Did you ever have the opportunity?
A. No, I never had that opportunity.
Q. Then you went to a meeting in 1939, November. Was that at the Reich Chancellory in Berlin?
A. I cannot recollect where that discussion took place, in what particular room.
Q. Well, I am not interested in the room; do you know where it was?
A. In Berlin.
Q. And Hitler was there and he had the ranking Generals there?
A. Yes.
Q. And you were there?
A. It was a very large meeting where the Commanders in Chief and all Commanding Generals and I don't know whether there were divisional commanders too but all those present ; I can't tell you the exact number of those present now but if I picture now the room where the meeting took place I think there were at least a hundred people or even more.
Q. And it was there that you and some of the other older Generals were accused by Hitler as being timid?
A. He had probably heard that ideas had been expressed against the war amongs the older Generals and that such thoughts existed and for that reason he reproached just us older Generals with our timidity.
Q. And when you were in the Southeast were you again accused of not being aggressive enough.
A. Keitel made a remark of that kind to me and he made this remark the reason that after my recovery I was not sent again to the Southeast.
Q. When was that that Keitel said that, if you can recall.
A. That was in March or April 1942.
Q. Where were yon at that time?
A. In Partenkirchen.
Q. Now, you have said that you have always held yourself above the Party considerations, that you tried to do your duty as a soldier and kept away from political things?
A, Yes
Q. Now, to your rank of Field Marshall, you were promoted Field Marshall when?
A. That was after the campaign against France July 1940.
Q. And to retrace for a moment, you have spoken of Keitel.
Will you tell the Tribunal who Keitel was.
A. He was Field Marshall Keitel and he was a Chief of the High Command of the Armed Forces.
Q. And how long did he hold that position, roughly. You don't have to give the exact date. Until approximately the end of the war?
A. I don't know when he started on this position but he occupied it until the end of the war.
Q. In 1940 when you were promoted Field Marshall in July following the campaign in France how many Field Marshalls were there in the Wehrmacht?
A. I cannot give the figure here now. I believe in the Army there were either nine or twelve Field Marshalls, but I can be mistaken in this figure and maybe included those people who were later promoted. I can't say for sure at the moment.
Q Well, then, do you knew what your position was in the rank list when you were promoted Field Marshal?
A I believe I was on the place after General von Bock.
Q Well, do you know numerically where you were or where von Bock was?
A It was the fifth or the sixth place.
Q So that in 1940 you were the fifth or sixth ranking Field Marshal in the army and did your position at any time between the time you were appointed Field Marshal in July, 1940, and the time when you retired from active duty in early September of 1942?
A No.
Q Roughly, from an area standpoint, how big was the territory under your command in the southeast?
AAt the time when I was Whehrmacht Commander Southeast, it was an area of about the size of Germany at that time.
Q Well, perhaps you can be a little more specific. The boundaries of Germany were changing somewhat in 1941.
A It is very difficult to say that. The distance from Belgrade to Grete would probably correspond with the distance from Aachen (Aix la Chapelle) to Minsk.
Q It certainly was an area which was substabtially larger than the Third Reich as it was constituted prior to 1 September 1939.
A Yes, it was larger. That is right.
Q When you commenced operations in the Southeast sometime early in April, 1941, how many troops did you have under your command?
A You mean the divisions, numerically? How many divisions?
Q Well, you were commander of an army.
Q And how many corps were in the army?
A The army had five corps.
Q You had an army which was composed of five corps and approximately how many devisions in total?
A It was somewhere between 10 and 15 divisions.
Q Well now, taking an army with ten to fifteen divisions, five corps, the necessary corps troops, and an army troops and army rear area troops, roughly how many men would you say that you had under your command?
AAbout 200,000.
Q And then after things got somewhat more stable in the Southeast and the second army under Field Marshal von Weichs had withdrawn, what troops did you have down there as of the date of approximately June, 1941?
A Do you mean at the time when I was already armed forces commander or at the time when I was only in Greece?
Q Well, let's take both of them. Let's take first when you just had Greece and then later when you were armed forces commander?
A In Greece I had, additionally, one corps and about fourand-a-half divisions and a few forces for security reasons, security battalions.
Q How many men would that make approximately?
THE PRESIDENT: May I make inquiry as to whether there is some mechanical trouble or something that this can be avoided.
MR. DENNEY: I know this isn't intentional, your Honor. I don't know -
THE PRESIDENT: Marshal, if you will try to ascertain the trouble.
Mr. Denney, the difficulty caused by this squeaking is apparently mechanical. They are calling a man up from the office. If it isn't to objectionable, if you can proceed until he gets here and if he comes and it is necessary, of course, to take a short recess, why we will do that, Mr. Marshal. If its gets too bad, we will stop until it is cleared up.
BY MR. DENNEY:
Q Just before we had the mechanical interruption, I had asked you how many men you had in Greece in these four-and-a-half divisions and the security battalions. Will you tell us, please?
A I cannot say that from memory. I can hardly say that or I can just say it very approximately. Roughly about 60,000 men.
Q And then when you became forces commander Southeast, what was the approximate strength of the troops under your command?
A That is even more difficult to estimate because I cannot recollect now how many security battalions and how many infantry battalions wore present in Serbia which also have to be taken into account apart from and besides the four divisions which were in any case stationed in Serbia. I can really not name a figure here because that would be too vague. If one counts the four divisions and the infantry battalions, that could have been also approximately somewhere between 50 and 60 thousand, but that is the best I can say.
Q Those were the troops in Serbia excluding the security battalions which you are unable to recall?
A I didn't understand the question.
Q And those four divisions and additional infantry regiments of which you spoke, 50 to 60 thousand men, are the troops in Serbia, not including the security battalions?
A This figure constitutes the troops in Serbia, divisions and security troops.
Q And those were in addition to the troops in Greece?
A Yes.
Q You have spoken about the chief of staff, various chiefs of staff which you had and the general staff. Will you tell the Tribunal what the duties of the chief of staff were, particularly with reference to the period when you were armed forces commander Southeast?
A The chief of Staff had charge of all affairs within the staff. He had to inform his commander in chief about the important matters and to make sure that the various department chiefs reported to him and that he in turn made this report. The current affairs of a not fundamental and basic nature. He was in a position to deal with himself, inasmuch as they concerned orders and instructions to lower echelons, he had to submit those to the commander in chief for signature and execution. The chief of staff is not concerned, with any matters of judicial activities.
Q Now, you say that he had charge of all the staff duties, Who were the members of a staff, what you call a generalstab?
A That would be department Ia. That is the department in charge of operations, troop movements, etc. Then department Ic, that is the intelligence service, and the quartermaster department. That deals with supplies, food rations, etc., and then there arc the departments for personnel matters and the medical service and the veterinary service and the administration.
The administration dealt with food supplies, clothing, etc.
THE PRESIDENT: Pardon me please. If we recess without leaving our positions, I think perhaps the mechanical difficulties can bo taken care of.
(A recess was taken.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 19 September 1947).WILHELM LIST - Resumed CROSS EXAMINATION (Continued)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed, Mr. Prosecutor.
BY MR. DENNEY:
Q Witness, just before we suspended you were detailing the composition of a general staff. You spoke of the duties of the chief of staff, stating that he had charge of all of the duties that were performed by the various staff members; that the chief of staff had to. . inform the commander - in your case that would be the commanding general or the commanding field marshal - on all important matters; that the chief of staff had to be sure that all of the departmental chiefs reported to him as chief of staff about the various matters that occurred within their departments and that he in turn passed this information on to you. Do you recall that?
A Yes.
Q And then you indicated the positions of some of the staff members, the Ia who is the operations officer, and that I believe is similar to the G3 in a general staff in the United States Army. Are you familiar with the American terminology?
A No.
Q Thank you. And the Ic who was in charge of intelligence, the quartermaster and various other general staff officers, including those in charge of personnel, medical matters, veterinary matters and administrative matters.
Now, what was the rank of your chief of staff when you were Armed Forces Commander South-East?
A. Foertsch was at that time a Colonel.
Q Now, what was the rank of his subordinates in the staff, that is, the Ia, Ic, quartermaster, and so forth?
A They were at that time, as far as I can remember, lieutenant colonels. Whether Kuebler was at that time already a full colonel I don't know.
Q But in any event the chief of staff or the members of the staff did not have general officer rank?
A Later on, yes; not at that time.
Q Yes; but then?
AAt that time, no.
Q Any orders that they issued were issued in your name?
A When I had given instructions, then, yes. As far as I know I didn't sign them in my own hand. Most of the orders which I issued, I signed myself.
Q Were any of them authorized to issue orders on your behalf?
A That is very difficult to say. Generally speaking, as far as I remember, the signature would read: "On behalf of" even if the order did not originate with me, but with the High Command of the Army; but when I had given the instruction, then the department chief concerned or the chief of staff would act on his own responsibility.
Q Well, if an order came down from the OKW it would be addressed to you as Armed Forces Commander South-East, would it not?
A Yes, it would be addressed to the office of the Wehrmacht Commander South-East.
Q And it was not addressed to one of your staff members?
A No, but on principle it was addressed to the official office of the Armed Forces Commander. It would not be addressed to me personally or to my particular department. It was just addressed to the Armed Forces Commander South-East as the responsible office, that is, not concerning the person of the Armed Forces Commander, but his official capacity and then within his office the orders would be passed on to the various departments which were responsible for their carrying out.
Q Well now, these departments, when they passed the orders on, were acting for you, were they not?
Cuurt V Case VII
A. I don't think we are getting this quite clear. The departments worked for the official office of the Wehrmacht Commander South-East and within this office there was a large machinery of offices working and the Question was now whether the document concerned had to he submitted to the Armed Forces Commander South-East personally or whether it would be dealt with within the various departments.
I believe one has to make a difference between the person of the Armed Forces Commander South-East and his office irrespective of person. It was customary in the Army to say the "Armed Forces Commander" or "Commander in Chief" meaning only his office. In this case it was the Armed Forces Commander South-East. So if some enlisted men needed uniforms and this request was addressed to the Armed Forces Commander South-East, the request would be dealt with by the office and not by the Armed Forces Commander in person. One has to make a difference between the concept of his official office and his person.
Q. Well, let's take as an example, suppose the Quartermaster general in the OKW staff decided that all of the troops in your area should wear hob--nail boots and the appropriate order was sent down? That order could be passed on without referring it to you by the Quartermaster of your staff. Isn't that so?
A. In this case that would have been possible. Of course, he would inform me if it were a matter which concerned the troops generally.
Q. And when he passed the order on he would pass it on in your name, but being done by him as the Quartermaster officer?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, at this same time you also held a position as commanding general of the 12th-Army. Is that so?
A. As Commander in Chief of the 12th Army. I think in the American Army the corresponding position would be that of Commanding General.
Q. Yes, commander in chief, excuse me. And did you have a staff on the 12th Army, a general staff?
A. No. It was exactly the same staff. There was only one staff.
Q Now, did the 12th Army have any troops down there?
A Yes.
Q How many troops did the 12th Army have?
AAs I said this morning, there were at the beginning of the occupation period about four and a half divisions and a general command.
Q And the same staff functioned as your general staff for you both in your positions as commander in chief of the 12th Army and as Armed Forces Commander -- South-East?
A Yes.
Q Now, did your staff officers, including the chief of staff, have any authority to issue orders without your consent?
A I have already stated that they had that possibility; that the example which you gave, for instance, that would have been possible; such an order could have been issued and passed on without my consent or at least without me being informed previously or without my consent being obtained previously. Later I would have been informed.
Q Yes, but disregarding those types of administrative orders, letting those aside, did they have the authority to issue other orders of their own volition?
A That is very difficult to say here and it is difficult to comprehend for people who have not grown up within the German Armed Forces and know all the conditions prevailing there. They had the right in case an order was extremely urgent. For instance, orders to a commanding general, if the order was to the effect that the respective commanding general had to carry it out, execute it and pass it on in that case they did not have any authority. But when matters were concerned which the commanding general would not have to carry out in person but again a subordinate office of his then they had the possibility.
Q Let's at the moment disregard orders that came down from either OKW or OKH. Did your chief of staff or any of the members of your general staff, either in the 12th Army or in the Supreme South-East, have any authority to initiate on their own and pass on those orders to lower troop units without consulting you?
A I previously stated to which extent it was possible for them. I was not concerned in my statement whether they were orders from the OKH or OKW. They might also be forders from the Supreme Command South-East, that is, orders for which the commanding general was not the person who executed them.
Q And at a later time would any such orders that they initiated and passed on to lower troops be made known to you?
A That depended on what matters were concerned. If not very important matters were concerned then perhaps I was not informed. Generally speaking, I would have been informed but there was a multitude of things which were carried out by departments Ia, IIa, Ic, et cetera. I was not informed, as matter of course, if the department chief concerned was of the opinion that it wasn't necessary that the commanding chief was informed. It was a general custom in the whole German army.
Q Did they give tactical orders without your knowledge?
A Tactical orders of a larger extent, no.
Q Well, how big an operational order could they give without consulting you?
A I cannot state that here in theory. That is quite impossible. It depended on the actual situation in how far the chief or the la believed to be able to act independently and just told the Army Corps Commands it had to be done in such and such manner.
Q And if he did that you would later find out about it?
A Yes, I believe that later on I would have obtained information about these things. It couldn't be any different.
Q And if an improper order had been given, one with which you disagreed, you would, when you heard about it, take steps to correct it?
A That again is difficult to say theoretically what I would have done. Again it would depend on the individual case in which manner I would have to intervene.
Q And one last question on the staff. You said; as I recall it; the duties of the chief involed the coordination of all the staff information that came and the presentation to you of that information?
A Yes. It was his task to be responsible for a uniform carrying cut of all the work within the staff.
Q And sometimes he would do that by showing you reports and other times by giving you an oral summary?
A No; that is not the correct concept of the activities of such a staff. There was such a multitude of departments in such a staff and in general the chief of staff was in charge of things and he would say to the department chief concerned; "Go and tell this to the commander in chief," and on other occasions he would submit it himself. On other occasions again he would just summarize and give the report in summary.
Q Do you recall telling Dr. Laternser on Wednesday that the main form of giving you information was a summarized report?
A I did say that to Dr. Laternser but in answer to a very specific question; that is; the question of the reports that had come in; but now I have been asked by the Prosecution about the summary of the activities of the various department with the supreme command and that is something different. The chief could not; for instance; report matters of Department IV-a; that is; supplies and so forth. Of course he could not give detailed reports on that.
Q But he could give you general reports about it?
A Even that he did not do concerning these departments --- the department chiefs themselves came to report to me. He might maybe say, "A certain thing has happened in a certain department and the chief concerned will come and report to you," or "The army doctor will come and report to you, but the report in detail was then given by the army physician.
Q Do you recall Exhibit 15 which is the Hitler Order of 9 June 1941 which details you as the Wehrmacht Commander South-East?
A Yes.
Q And that superseded a prior order known as Hitler Order 29, did it not?
A No.
Q And that is Exhibit 9, the Hitler Order No. 29. Incidentally, the Hitler Order No. 29 is dated 17 May 1941. I think maybe we can pass to the Order of 9 June 1941, Exhibit 13. Now, that order subordinated to you the Commander Serbia?
A Yes. That was the Hitler order 31. That is correct.
Q And do you recall a provision in that order which stated that with the exception of the conduct of offensive air warfare, the Wehrmacht Commander South-East is to bring together in a unified control all military questions of the Wehrmacht which arise from the occupation, security, supply, transport and communication affairs of the occupied south-East area? This is to be done for all throe Wehrmacht branches. Do you recall that provision in the order?