Court No. V, Case No. VII.
Q. How long were you Chief of Staff of the XIIth Army?
A. I was Chief of Staff of the XIIth Army until the middle of May.
Q. You've stated that Greece capitulated sometime towards the end of April, 1941. Do you recall who signed the capitulation on the part of Greece?
A. The capitulation of the Epirus Army was signed by the Commander in Chief, General Zolakoglou, or something like that. That was the name.
Q. Do you know, General, that General Zolakoglou became Quisling Premier of the Greek Government during the German occupation of Greece?
A. Yes. I remember that General Zolakoglou, during the last days of my presence there, took over the government.
Q. I wonder if you ever heard the General Zolakoglou died while awaiting charges for being a traitor to his people? Have you ever heard that by any chance?
A. No, that's the first I hear of it.
Q. Do you happen to know what happened to King George and the Government of Greece and what they did prior to the capitulation by General Zolakoglou?
A. Yes, as far as I know, the Greek Government fled. I don't know where it fled to Crete or to Africa. I don't know. At least when we came to Athens the Greek Government was no longer on the Greem mainland.
Q. King George and his Government had fled to Crete and then to Egypt, and finally to London, didn't they. General?
A. It probably would have been like that. I assume this to be correct.
Q. And King Peter and his government of Yugoslavia fled to London end set up a Yugoslavian Government in Exile did they not?
A. Yes.
Q. General, isn't it true that one of the most important reasons motivating the German release of the Greek soldiers was the fact that you didn't want to feed these soldiers?
A. I don't believe that this was the cause, because practically during the first period at least the soldiers of the Epirus Army had to be fed by us, because, I believe I already said, the state of the soldiers of this Epirus Army was so bad that they could not have stayed the course by their own means for any length of time.
Q. General, Germany simply guessed wrong by releasing all the Greek prisoners after the capitulation did they not? You never anticipated that Greek resistance would flare up in the future. That was a bad military guess on your part?
A. As far as I know from the orders of the OKH there was no necessity to retain these prisoners because we say no danger for the future and for that reason we had no cause to keep these soldiers.
Q. That turned out to be rather a bad guess?
THE ENGLISH GERMAN INTERPRETER: There was a wrong translation on my part. (CORRECTING HIMSELF BY REPEATING).
BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:
A. Yes, I believe that under the conditions obtaining at that time and with the German superiority this guess must be understandable. I don't know whether one should call this guess wrong at that time.
Q. General, did you know whether the Greek soldiers were pleged not to take up arms again following the capitulation?
A. I cannot recall that paragraph in the capitulation instrument. I don't know whether it was really put like that, but I assume that such a paragraph was contained in it, but I don't know, at least regarding the officers.
Q. General, the procedure in a matter of that kind is to ask each individual soldier to pledge himself in writing not to take up arms against the victor. Isn't it?
A. No, that is practically impossible. I believe that is out of the question.
Q. You don't believe that provision that each individual soldier must sign an individual pledge in writing is contained in the Hague Rules of Land Warfare?
A. I don't know whether that is the case.
Q. General, you stated that on the basis of your long acquaintance with Field Marshal List you know him to have opposed the Party, to have opposed the Party's attitude regarding the Jews, and to have been a steady and consistent church goer. Would you say that Field Marshal List was considered politically unreliable by Hitler?
A. I cannot say that. I have no proof for that.
Q. Do you know whether Field Marshal List's attitude towards the Party and the Party's actions against the Jews was well known prior to 1939?
A. That it was known to Hitler, do you mean that? I haven't understood.
Q. I mean whether Hitler knew it, whether Keitel knew it, whether lots of the German officers surrounding List knew it.
A. Whether Hitler knew it I cannot say that because I had too little contace. But I believe I said yesterday that one who was especially opposed to Hitler and his measures was the then Chief of Staff, Col. Oloricht, and that this man was known as such to his superior officers.
At least that is what I assume.
Q. Did you believe that if Field Marshal List was an out-spoken critic of the Party and that if his criticism of the Party was well known, that he ever would have been appointed Field Marshal by Hitler in 1940?
A. That Field Marshal List was a sharp critic of the Party, there's no doubt about that. I know that from a large number of conversations of former years. That he was made a Field Marshal I believe has its only reason in his military service of that time during the war; otherwise I cannot explain.
Q. But Hitler was very anxious to gain control of the Army, General. In 1938 he replaced Fritsch because he couldn't trust him, and he put in Brauchitsch as Commander in Chief of the Army, and I believe at the same time he got rid of von Blomberg because he couldn't trust him, and he was very find of promoting officers upon whom he could rely politically. He promoted Rommel, Reichenau, and Schoerner.
A. Yes, that is right without any doubt.
Q. And Hitler was very anxious to indoctrinate the Army with National Socialism, and have the officers indoctrinate their men with Party principles, was he not?
A. Yes.
Q. And in 1940 he promoted the then Generaloberst List to become Field Marshal, did he not?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. General, you said that Field Marshal List and 1 suppose you yourself and other members of the XIIth Army had misgivings about the invasion of Greece. Did you ever consider that to be an unjust war on Germany's part?
A. We all regretted very much that we had to attack Greece and the Break people, and we all -- I can testify to chat -- we all took part very unwilling in this campaign because we all had nothing against the Greeks or the Greek Army.
We had nothing against them whatsoever.
Q. What were the political reasons which moved Hitler to conduct this campaign?
A. That I cannot say from my viewpoint at this time nor from my viewpoint today. I cannot say. I only know the military reasons of which we wore informed.
Q. General, did you ever feel that the order to invade Greece and Yugoslavia was an illegal order and that by virtue of Paragraph 47 of the German Military Code you had a duty to disobey illegal orders?
A. This impression of the advance into Greece being illegal we didn't have, at least we at the front didn't have it, because the reasons which we had been given by superior headquarters were sufficient that we had to assume that it was absolutely necessary and that the Greeks, by letting the British enter their country, had no longer kept the neutrality which was to be expected. That was our view.
Q. You agree, do you not, General, that a German officer has a duty to disobey illegal orders according to paragraph 47?
A. Yes.
Q. General, you have said that Fieldmarshal List liked the Greeks so much that he permitted them to fly their flag on the national palace beside the German flag?
A. Yes, that is what I said. That was to be a gesture.
Q. When you were in Athens, you no doubt walked up to the Akropolis and saw the Parthenon?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you ever see the Greek flag flying beside the German flag atop the Parthenon?
A. I believe at my time the Greek flag was not hoisted there. I don't believe it but I cannot say with certainty, I know that Fieldmarshal List had the intention to carry this out but I don't know whether it happened during my time.
Q. Could it have been possible that during your time only the Nazi flag was flying there?
A. I believe there was a flag there certainly, but it certainly was the Reich war flag. We didn't have any other flag. The troops didn't have any other flags.
Q. General von Greiffenberg, you have said that through your knowledge of Fieldmarshal List you didn't believe he would ever do anything that was not warranted by military necessity?
A. Yes, I said that. That is right.
Q. Do you consider the execution of hostages at ratios from one to fifty and one to one hundred, and the burning down of villages in reprisal, measures of military necessity?
A. I cannot answer this question because I don't know the situation in which these measures were taken and subsequently I can't give any judgment whether this was really military necessity. I don't know it.
Q. You are not familiar with the problems which Fieldmarshal List fused in the Southeast? You can't very well say then that he always acted according to dictates of military necessity, can you?
A. No, I only want to express the fact that I can only imagine with difficulty that the Fieldmarshal who, I and our soldiers so highly regarded, that he would do something which was not dictated by military necessity, and which was not indispensable, I believe I said it in this way and I want to express it like this.
Q. General von Greiffenberg, were you ever of the opinion that the execution of hostages simply made matters worse, that they increased the resistance of the occupied peoples?
A. I have no practical experience regarding the question of hostages. I was always stationed where there was no question of taking hostages, and I cannot give you any judgment on the practical result of the taking of hostages. It is quite clear, as far as I know, that an execution or shotting of hostages always carries the danges of counter-measures and of increasing counter-measures. I lack however, practical experience in these matters.
Q. General, do you recall being interrogated here in Nurnberg on the 15th of January, 1947?
A. Yes.
Q. You weren't under indictment at that time, were you?
A. No.
Q. And you gave your testimony voluntarily and without threat of coercion?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you recall at that time being asked about certain directives which had been issued in connection with the waging of partisan warfare?
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honor, before this interrogation is made a subject of this examination here, I would like to say for a copy of it. First of all, I want to look through it before it is being discussed.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: We have no objection to that, your Honor.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Very well.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: The copy which we are handing to your Honor is simply for your information. We are not intending to offer them as an exhibit.
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honor, from the statement of the prosecutor, I gather that he is submitting copies of this statement for the information of the Court. He cannot do this. The prosecution can only submit material for the information of the Court with my consent. I would like to ask the prosecutor that we can first examine.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: My first words were misspoken, your Honor. I simply intended for you to have copies while we were going over the question and answers, for no other purposes of explanation.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I believe the explanation obviates the necessity of inquiring as to the rather irregular fashion but if your thought is to interrogate the witness as to statements previously made by him and which arc in contradiction of statements that he had given on the stand, you may proceed; but further than that, I think the statement is inadmissible. First, it obviously wasn't made in the presence of any of these defendants and except as it bears on his credibility would be inadmissible.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: May I proceed without waiting for Dr. Laternser to finish examining the interrogations, your Honor?
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honor, first of all I ask that the prosecutor is asked to withdraw the record of the interrogation. If he wants to examine the witness, if he wants to examine the witness about my incidents in his interrogation---
(Stopped by interpreter)
I object first of all that this record is being used here, and I ask that the prosecutor is asked to withdraw his copies which have been distributed. Would the Court please decide about this question?
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: The Court cannot be seriously influenced by immaterial matter that may have been handed by the prosecutor but the point that we are interested in at the present time is a question of his examining the witness upon interrogations previously made on the 15th of January. Have you any objection to that procedure?
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honor, I can only judge this after the question have been asked, because I cannot object to the examination. I can only object to question which I consider inadmissible.
CROSS EXAMINATION - (Continued) BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:
Q. General von Greiffenberg, do you recall being asked on the 15th of January, 1947, several questions regarding the issuance of directives of OKW regarding the combatting of bands?
A. Yes, and I was interrogated on that.
Q. Now, do you recall being asked this question and giving this answer on that occasion?
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honor, the prosecutor now starts an examination about a. point which was not subject of the direct examination. Now it is the intention of the prosecution to make this witness into a prosecution witness, I emphatically object to this kind of examination. Now I ask since the prosecutor intends to read from a document which I don't know, that this examination is declared to be inadmissible. He can only use documents if they have been submitted 24 hours in advance to the defense.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Dr. Sauter?
DR. SAUTER: Your Honor, I would like to ask the prosecution that it submit to me and to the other defense counsel copies of this examination, The witness is now to be examined about a subject which is of importance to the defendant Lanz and von Geitner. I my-self want to know it. I also want to know what this document contains and for that reason I must insist that I get a German copy of this document.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: For the time being, you may proceed.
CROSS EXAMINATION - (Continued) BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:
Q. General von Greiffenberg, were you asked this question on the 15th of January, 1947, and did you give this answer at that time? This is question 17 for the interpreters' information.
"However that may be, it is established that this directive for the combatting of bands in our opinion contains paragraphs which go far beyond that which is permissible, according to principles of International Law or humanity. Within this scope, there is a series of directives and orders which have fallen into hour hands in the course of the last years of the Balkan theater of operations and which are streaming in now as before. There is a series of directives which, just to pick out an example, are built on the principle that to an attack on one member of the German Wehrmacht fifty, seventy-five and sometimes even one hundred Serbians or Croatians are to be executed. I see that these matters arc not unknown to you. May I learn from you how you, as a member of the general staff, chief of several army groups and with your broad military experience and disposed to those matters?
"A. I head the some in the case of von Mackensen whereby a rather large number of retaliation prisoners were executed, when the perpetrators themselves could not be determined. Ever today I am still of the opinion that nothing is helped by these measures on the contrary in the case of fanatic opponents--and that is what most of the Slavic peoples are who posses a very strong feeling for their country--the matter is simply goaded on. Consequently, I cannot imagine that anything could be gained through measures of this kind whereby for one murdered man, fifty other men who have nothing to do with the deed are executed. It on represents a possibility of momentary intimidation which in the last analysis must needs lead to a more stubborn resistance. I do not only regard it as cruelty but also as absolutely false and ineffective f or the purpose of maintaining peace in the country."
Were you asked that question and did you give that answer, General von Greiffenberg?
A. Yes, the question was put to me as far as I remember and I gave the answer. That is, the sense of the answer, and as far as I remember it today, it is correct.
Q. Were you asked this question and did you give this answer at that time?
"Q. Would you answer the question respecting the justification of destroying villages in a similar manner?
"A. Yes. When the villages were to be destroyed in Russia, we, as leaders of units, turned against this because the measures were just as detrimental to our own leadership of units as to the enemy.
A. Yes.
Q. Were you asked this question and did you give this answer at the same time?
"Q. I am now thinking of cases where the inhabitants of the village gave protection to partisans. In reply to this protection, the destruction of the village and also, as we gather from certain orders, the destruction of the neighboring village was frequently ordered, a matter which in our eyes cannot be justified in any way, and which we regard as criminal. Would you agree to this characterization?
"A. Yes. If villages are destroyed in order to mete out vengeance, then I see no reason for it. First of all, it has no sense and, secondly, the people of the neighboring village could not help it. I think that this is the general opinion.
A. Yes, I had this feeling.
Q. Were you asked this question and did you give this answer on the same occasion?
"Q. Recently, I have spoken with higher officers on this question, In German documents, the opponent is often designated as "Bandit." Simultaneously, the expressions "Bandit-brigade, bandit-divisions"/ sometimes oven with numbers crop up. It is our impression that there is a discrepancy here since a band is not organized like a brigade or division.
Can you tell me what, in your opinion, explains the continued use of the expression "band" when the Ic's knew very well that it was a matter of organized units who had at their disposal definite equipment and weapons and which again were subordinated to another unit?
"A. I heard that the expression "bands" was ordered in contrastwhich had been customarily--to partisans."
A. Yes.
Q. Were you asked this question and did you give this answer on the same day?
"What, in your opinion, explains this order?
"A. In the partisan one can assume a loyal fighter, whereas one always understands something criminal in the expression "bandit".
A. Yes.
Q. Were you asked this question and did you give this answer on the same day?
"Q. Would that have any consequences with respect to the treatment of the opponent?
"A. Yes, if an opponent does something with a criminal intent which is not permissible by military laws, then he does not deserve the honorable name "partisan." Then he is a criminal, a bandit."
A. Yes.
Q. Were you asked this question and did you give this answer on the same occasion?
"Q. Then in your opinion would it be correct that the order according to which the expression "bands" is to be used represents nothing other than an attempt to create an atmosphere on the basis of which ruthlessness and brutality with respect to the "bandit" are more readily permitted than with respect to an enemy recognized by military law?
"A. I think, yes."
A. Yes.
Q. Do you stand by the opinions you gave on that day now, General von Greiffenberg?
A. Yes.
Q. General von Greiffenberg, did you ever hear anything about the Rosenberg unit operating beside the 12th Army in Greece?
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Just a moment, Mr. Fenstermacher. It seems to me in the light of the apparent frankness of this witness in recognition of the answers previously given, it would only be fair to him on this record to include also Question 24 and the answer if it appears there.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I will be glad to do that, Your Honor.
CROSS EXAMINATION (Continued) BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:
Q. General von Greiffenberg, on the 15th of January, 1947, were you asked this question and did you give this answer on that occasion?
"Q. This is only a theoretical discussion hut nonetheless it has a much greater significance.
"From what period on would one speak of an organized resistance of organized forces in Jugoslavia and Greece? -- You were not in the Balkans, this perhaps is a question which you cannot answer.
"A" No, I cannot answer it."
A. That is correct.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Thank you...
DR. LATERNSER, did you have some observation you wish to make to the Tribunal?
DR. LATERNSER: I object to the question which was just put last. The prosecutor now asks the witness regarding incidents of the Rosenberg unit in the Balkans. I have not dealt with this in the direct examination and I don't think the prosecutor should be allowed to refer to it during his cross examination.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Your objection may be technically correct but I think the witness will be able to answer it without harm to himself or without injustice to the defendant.
BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:
Q. General von Greiffenberg, do you recall whether a Rosenberg unit was operating with the 12th Army while you were chief of staff to the 12th Army in 1941?
A. I personally don't remember this incident but I have read it somewhere, I believe, in the indictment or somewhere else. There I first was struck by the term "Rosenberg column" or something like that.
Q. Is it true that Rosenberg units were sent into the occupied territories to plunder the libraries of those countries and to bring back valuable works of art to Germany?
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I am inclined to think from his previous answer the lack of knowledge of this question would be futile, would it not?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I will try to qualify it, Your Honor.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Very well.
BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:
Q. General, have you any idea what the Rosenberg units in the occupied countries did?
A. No, I had no knowledge of this. I only know it from rumors.
Q. General, would you look at Exhibit 4-A in Document Book I at page 8 of the English Document Book and at page 7 of the German Document Book? General, this is a latter from Rosenberg to Bormann and if you will look on page 10 of the German Document Book; page 9 of the English Your Honor, you will note under paragraph 2 the last sentence of that paragraph, this sentence.--
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honor, I have just been told that the translation said it was a letter of Rosenberg to Boehme; that would of course create a wrong impression in the witness.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: The question should say a letter from Rosenberg to Bormann.3
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Very well.
BY MR FENSTERMACHER:
Q. If you look at the last sentence of the first full paragraph under paragraph two, it states there: "And on command of General Fieldmarshal List as well as of his deputy general, these men will also be employed---" This is on page 10 I believe at the top of page 10 in the German and in the middle of page 9 in the English Document Book.
It states there: "And on command of General Fieldmarshal List, as well as of his deputy general, those men will also be employed in closest relationship with Security Service SD in Salonika. As you know, Salonika is one of the largest Jewish centers."
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Just a moment before he answers that question. I think it should appear as a part of that question that the defendant Fieldmarshal List has denied knowledge of the statement enclosed in that letter.
BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:
Q. What his Honor said was true General von Greiffenberg. General Feildmarshal List has denied knowledge of the letter and he has also denied what he has given any command with respect to the last sentence which I have just read to you.
A. Yes.
Q. I ask you now whether yon ever heard of an order of Fieldmarshal List regarding the cooperation of the Rosenberg units with the 12th Army?
A. No. I don't know any such order and this letter too I see here for the first time, it's completely new to me.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: The Tribunal will take a recess until 11:15.
( A recess was taken).
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
JUDGE BURKE: You may proceed, Mr. Fenstermacher.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Thank you, Your Honor.
Q General, I would like you now to look at Exhibit 10, which is on page 38 of the English and page 27 of the German Document book I. General, this is an enclosure to the War Diary of the Commander of the Rear Area 560 and dated Athens, 21 May 1941. It subject is "Commitment of the Offices of Reich Leader Rosenberg in the Army Area. In compliance with the orders of 12th Army, 19 April 1941." Then the code number of the order, "there is in operation, in the area, in the area of the 12th Army Special Unit of Reich Leader Rosenberg which was the task to examine state libraries, archives and offices of the high church authorities, Free lodges and Jewish organizations for political incidents directed against the Reich and of having the material in question confiscated." Does this refresh your recollection with regard to any orders of the 12th Army with respect to the Rosenberg units? Here is states in compliance with the orders of the 12th Army of 19 April 1941?
A I do not remember this order which is being submitted here. It is signed by a Quatermaster, and it went out, at least as far as I can see from this document, by the I-C Counter-intelligence 1031. As I have said previously, I do not know this order and this Special Command Rosenberg and its tasks are not known to me, at least I cannot remember these facts, as I have said previously.
Q Would affairs of the I-C of the 12th Army of April 1941, generally speaking, come to your attention as Chief of Staff?
A Yes, but the Department IC-AO had a special channel. The Ic of an Army or of a military authority was subordinate to the Chief of Staff or the Commander in Chief, negatively and had to submit to him matters of importance, but the Ic-AO had a different position; he reported immediately to the OKW Counter-Intelligence, and for this reason is I have said before, A cannot recollect that such an order, which was signed by an entirely different department, that is by the Quatermaster would reach Field Marshal List, or would reach me.
Q General, do you know whether Field Marshal List had Hitler's confidence at the time he was appointed Commander in Chief of Army Group A in Russia?
A I am not in a position be answer this question, because I do not know this personal relationship between Field Marshal List and the Fuehrer. Since I left the 12th Army, up until the time when Field Marshal List joint our Group, I don't think I have ever not or see him I can't remember.
Q Did you hear anything in Army circles to the effect that Field Marshall List had Keitel's confidence and support?
A No, I didn't hear anything to the effect that the reason Field Marshall List was not sent back to the Southeast as Commander of Chief of Army Group 12 was because he no longer held the confidence of Hitler and Keitel?
A I beg your pardon. I didn't understand that. Sent back to the 12th Army.
Q You will recollect Field marshall List became ill in June 1941, and that he did not return the Southeast after having been replaced by General Kuntze. I am wondering if you ever heard anything in the course of your.....
A No, I was engaged in another campaign, and knew nothing about those matters.
Q Do you believe Field Marshall List would have been named Commander in Chief of Army Group A in Russia if he had not had the confidence of Hitler and Keitel.
A I cannot answer that question offhand. I believe that Field marshal List was regarded as an especially proved and reliable Army leader, a reliable leader who had particular experience in the sphere of mountain warfare, and since this Army Group has as its target the subjection of the Caucasus area, I believe his knowledge of the mountain area and his military experience was a special reason to give him these tasks.
I did not talk to Field Marshal about this, but took it as a matter of course.
Q You mean by mountain experience in Partisan warfare?
A No, I mean by that mountain experience, I mean the fighting of troops in mountainous areas during summer and winter, in high mountains, and since the General was a man who knew about these things he was the proper person to fulfill this very difficult task, and that is what I wanted to express.
Q In July 1942 Field Marshal List took command of Army Group A in Russia, and you were in his Chief of Staff?
A Yes.
Q How many men were subordinate to Field Marshal List as Commander in Chief of Army Group A at that time?
AArmy Group A had subordinate to it at the beginning when they started, four armies, of which however the left one and the right one were dropped after a short time, so altogether two armies remained under its command.
Q About how many men or troops were there?
A I am no longer in a position to make a reliable statement as to how many divisions there were.
Q Could you hazard a guess?
A I am afraid I would give quite an arbitrary number. For instance, if an Army had 10 divisions, that could have meant they had 40 divisions, but that is just a guess, and I have to make that quite clear, I don't know it.
Q Would you say there were over a million men under a million men?
A I don't know.
Q The 11th Army under Manstein was subordinate to Army Group A at tint time, wasn't it? General?
A Yes, for a few days.
Q And is it true, General, that the rear area of an Army is also within the jurisdiction of the Army Commander and that he is held responsible by the OKW for the activities in that area as well as for the a activities at the front?
A The rear army area is subordinate to the Military Commander, that is quite correct.
Q And the commander of the Rear Army area reports to the Army and when an Army Group is involved then the Army in turn reports to the Army Group, is that correct?
A That is front events is reported by the Army to the Army Group, because the Army Group is the most superior operative unit, as we call it. Matters which took place in the rear army area were reported, as far as I recollect by the Commander in the rear Army area, to his Army, or I believe to the Quatermaster General, I believe that is how it was.
Q Could the Army Commander pass on important events which wore occurring in the rear of the Army to the Army Group Commander in order, that the Army Group Commander would Know what was happening in this area?
A Yes, inasmuch as operational maters were concerned and matters, in my opinion were not amongs the tasks of the Commander in Chief of the Army Group. He merely had the operational and tastical leadership of the armies. The situation at the beginning of the Russian campaign was that the Army Group didn't even have a quatermaster or anything like that. It only had a very small operational department.