Q Did you get any information regarding the Balkans which could have given you a good picture of the Balkans?
A No, because the Balkans became a theater of war of the OKW.
Q Now, we come back to the contents of that interrogation. You said at question 18 of your conversation that you thought the shooting of hostages was not inhumane, but was completely wrong. Do you know or don't you know that the shooting of hostages is admissible according to international law?
A Yes, the shooting of hostages is admissible. I believe it is, at least.
Q Do you know the American rules of warfare?
A No, I don't know them.
Q Do you know that the American rules......
JUDGE BURKE: (Interrupting) He has already answered that he doesn't know.
BY DR. LATERNSER:
Q Do you know that the English rules do not prohibit the shooting of hostages?
A No, I don't know these rules.
Q. In the course of this conversation you said, and I quote now, Question 18 and answer:
"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."
Do you consider the destruction of villages, if it is not detrimental to your own troops and if the destruction is caused by military necessity, do you then consider it admissible?
A Yes.
Q You then go on to say in your answer to Question 19:
"If villages were destroyed in order to meet 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."
Witness, I am in complete accord with you about this that if villages are burned down for vengeance that this is forbidden and should be forbidden. How is it, however according to your military experience, if, for instance, a village has served as a stronghold for a band? Then, the destruction of the village in order to exterminate this support and stronghold, is it then admissible?
A In my view, it is then a military necessity.
Q And what about the case of villagers shooting out of a village at passing troops? Would you judge this question as you have judged the previous question?
A That depends on the situation.
Q If you say "that depends on the situation", do you mean that it is dependent on whether it is dictated by military necessity or not?
A Yes, I mean that.
Q Now, a few supplementary questions.
You were chief of staff of Field Marshal List at the time when he was commander-in-chief of Army Group A. What kind of a staff was the staff of an army group?
AArmy group?
Q Army group, yes.
AAn army group is, according to German usage, the highest authority in the field which has to do with operational questions.
Q Do you mean operational questions of leadership?
A Yes, I mean operational questions. Questions of an operational leadership.
Q Han an army group only these operational tasks?
AAt the beginning of the war, those were its only tasks. Later, questions of supply fell within its competence.
Q We don't want to become that general. I'm just asking what was the situation with regard to the staff of Field Marshal List when he was in Russia. Was there the most essential tasks of the staff to deal with operational questions?
A The operational leadership was far and away the most important task.
Q Which departments did the Army Group A have at that time?
A The decisive departments were Department 1-A, Department 1-C, that is, the adjutant's office, and the Quartermaster. Apart from that, there were departments of a less important nature.
Q What was the staff of an army group of the kind which was at the disposal of Field Marshal List as compared with the strength of the staff of an army?
AAccording to my knowledge and according to my memory, the staff of an army was much bigger.
Q What do you mean by considerably stronger?
A Far more special departments.
Q And what was the channel of command from these special depart-ments to the superior headquarters?
A From these special departments, the channel of command led to the four big groups I mentioned before: 1-A, 1-C, Quartermaster, etc., end thus that is, only the most important things came to the knowledge of the commander-in-chief.
Q Did the army group have territorial tasks? I mean the Army Group A.
AAs far as I remember, Army Group A later.........
Q (Interrupting) I'm not asking you later. I am questioning you about the time when Field Marshal List led this Army group. That is, unit 1 the 10th of September, 1942.
A Yes. As far as I remember, it, first of all and not later when it approached the Caucasus, had certain territorial tasks.
Q Which territorial tasks?
A They consisted of the administration of the country, through the commander of the rear area of that army, in maintaining order.
Q Now, a few questions regarding the Commissar Order.
You said today in cross examination that Field Marshal Bock, at the time at which you were attached to him, received the Commissar Order.
A He had already received it earlier.
Q What did Field Marshal Bock tell you about this Commissar Order?
A Field Marshal von Bock was shocked about this Commissar Order.
Q Did he establish any contact with any one about this?
A Yes.
Q Whom?
A With the commander-in-chief of the army.
Q How?
MY. FENSTERMACHER: If Your Honor please, I object to these questions. I don't know why we are concerned with the actions of Field Marshal von Bock with regard to the Commissar Order.
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honor, I wanted to show that from many sides there was opposition to the Commissar Oeder at the time at which it was issued. Effective steps were taken which finally led to the fact that the Commissar Order was canceled.
JUDGE BURKE(Interrupting): The objection is over-ruled. You may proceed.
BY DR. LATERNSER:
Q How did he communicate with the (OBDH) Commander-in-Chief of the German Army?
A He told me and so it was confirmed to me, he got together with Field Marshal von Kluge and both made representations to their superior officers, that is, the Commander-in-Chief of the German Army.
Q How did Field Marshal von Bock go about this?
AAs far as I remember - that is how he told me - he did it by telephone.
I believe also he communicated his personal views in Berlin through his 1-C because he personally couldn't go.
Q Who was the IC at that time?
A The IC at that time was General Major (Brigadier General) von Gersdorff.
Q. Is that the same general who planned a bomb attack on Hitler?
A. Yes, that is the same.
Q. Now about the 11th Army, you were asked today how long the 11th Army was subordinate to Fieldmarshal List in his capacity as Commander-in --Chief of Army Group A. You said that this was only a matter of a few days. Could you give us more details about this, whether it was in your view four or five days or two weeks or could you give us some more details?
A. I assume from my memory that it must have been after about ten days but I cannot guarantee for this figure.
Q. Did Fieldmarshal List or Army Group A pass on directives to subordinate officers regarding the carrying out or the application of the Commissar Order?
A. No, that is not known to me.
A. And now one more question to the Commissar Order. Exhibit 13 was submitted to you, a document. Would you kindly look at the second paragraph of this exhibit on page 1 in the German book, page 35-A, and in the English Book on page 48-A? This second paragraph says, I am quoting now: "You are requested to limit the distribution to Commanders-in-Chief of armies or of air commands, etc." Page 33A in the German Book, the insert and page 48a in the English Book. No. page 35 in the German.
General, what does that mean? Does that mean the Commandersin-Chief in person or their offices.
A. I cannot give you any answer. I cannot find out by just looking at it.
Q. Now look at the top of this document. There it says "super top secret only through office." Does this "only through office" mean that this order was only intended for generals?
A. No, that has nothing to do with that.
A. Now we want to leave the Commissar order. I have only a few concluding questions now. General, you have been examined about Fieldmarshal List leaving his office and you said that not only the difference of opinions which had taken place then had been responsible for Fieldmarshal List leaving his post but that in your view there had been other causes as well.
What did you mean by that when you said that?
A. I meant that the aims which were given to the army group to fulfill and the impossible tasks and the constant intervention of the highest leadership which depressed the Fieldmarshal intensely brought him in sharp contrast to Hitler's leadership; not only this one local matter was the reason.
Q. What was Hitler's view regarding a general leaving his post?
A. Hitler in an order forbade generals to resign from their posts.
Q. You were asked today by the prosecutor and in his question it was implicit that this resignation of Fieldmarshal List was a voluntary resignation. Is that correct?
A. Fieldmarshal List resigned by his own decision.
Q. And why did he succeed to resign?
A. Because he objected to the directives and the whole ideas of the fuehrer.
Q. And why? Because this resignation corresponded to Hitler's desire?
A. I am sure that it corresponded to Hitler's wish.
Q. For instance, would a resignation have been possible against Hitler's wish?
A. I cannot assume that from my later experiences.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Dr. Laternser, I think this matter was covered to a very great extent yesterday and also this morning. It leaves nothing further for the imagination.
DR. LATERNSER: I have no further questions then.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Are there further questions by defense counsel?
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. Dr. Sauter for the defendants Lanz and von Geitner.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: You may proceed Dr. Sauter.
Q. Your Honor, I want to bog your pardon for not appearing here in the prescribed robe. I haven't got it with me at the moment. Mr. Witness, I have only a few short questions which were caused by the cross-examination of the prosecution. One preliminary question. In the course of the examination; you said that you were not a prisonerof-war but that you were an internee. Did I understand you correctly?
A. Yes, you did.
Q. You know, as a general, that you are entitled to your rights as a prisoner-of-war which are based on the Geneva convention?
A. Yes.
Q. How is it that you don't enjoy these rights, that you are no longer a prisoner-of-war but a civilian internee?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: If it please the Tribunal, I object to the question. I don't see that it is material or what relevance it has.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: The objection is overruled. You may proceed.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. Do you still remember this question; Mr. Witness?
A. Yes.
Q. I asked you how you at a time when no peace has been concluded you do not enjoy the rights based on the Geneva Convention but that you are looked upon as an internee.
A. All generals from our camp who were called prisoners-orwar until about two months ago have now been made internees.
Q. Were you at the same time released? Were you set at liberty when you were told that you were an internee?
A. No. Simultaneously we were not released but in the course of those two months, all generals, as far as they were not former general staff officers, were released.
Q. In your opinion did the general staff officers of the former German army, do they have no claim on the rights laid down in the Geneva Convention?
A. I don't know the provisions of the military government. I don't know that, how these things are being regulated.
Q. A change if I have understood you correctly, has not been caused in the actual conditions by your release, your so called release from being a prisoner-of-war. You remained behind locked doors?
A. Yes.
Q. Another question Mr. Witness, we shall submit document books to the Court which will prove the kind of warfare used by the partisans. I would rather put it at the end of our evidence but at that time you will not be here at our disposal. For that reason, I must now put these questions to you here. We shall prove, and please base your answer on that hypothetically, and we shall prove the following facts by document books.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I am sorry to have to interrupt but I object to the form of Dr. Sauter's question.
DR. SAUTER: First, I please ask Your Honor to wait until I have put the question and only then can it be decided whether this question is admissible or not.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Very well. Dr. Sauter, you may proceed.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. Witness, I have said we shall among other things prove the following facts from the partisans were many of them killed and were often mutilated, and previous to that were tortured in a most cruel manner. German soldiers were often, after having been captured, castrated while still alive, and the genitals put into their mouthes of the corpses. German soldiers were nailed against doors of barns while still alive, with nails, and they were exposed to death by hunger or thirst. German first aid stations were again and again shot at. German wounded wore killed at first-aid station. I repeat German first aid station were shot at again and again.
German wounded were killed at these first-aid stations. German ambulances with large red crosses were disregarded and were shot to pieces. In those cruelties and these fights, women and children also took part and the partisans often were civilian clothes while fighting, and they disguised themselves as harmless peasants or shepherds.
That is a part of what we shall prove, and I am able to tell you this here because I have the proofs in my documents which shall be submitted in the next weeks. All these statements are sworn to; in view of these facts, which I want you to take into consideration.
First of all, I put the following question to you. Firstly, did you until now have knowledge of the fact that this kind of warfare was waged by the partisans on the Balkans? I am putting the question to you because during your interrogation on the 15th of January, 1947, because in your interrogation you said something about the partisans and their legal status. This is the first question perhaps I can put another question to you so that the Court can decide about these questions. The second question which I will put to you is this.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Perhaps it would be well to confine yourself to the first one first if you have in form now questions to submit to the witness.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. The first question is this, whether you had knowledge of this kind of warfare by the partisans?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: If your Honor please, I object to these long speeches by Dr. Sauter in form of a question as to what he thinks he is going to prove. I think if this is his question he could have asked it much shorter and could have asked it from the very beginning. In fact, he ought to know from the testimony of the witness so far that the witness left the Balkans in May, 1941, and never returned.
DR. SAUTER: Your Honor -
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Just a moment, Dr. Sauter. It is the opinion of the Tribunal that if the witness assumes these facts to be true and if your proofs will sustain such facts then we will take the answer now.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. If I understood you correctly, you shall assume hypothetically that this is going to be proved and -
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: That is correct. Then we can eliminate any further discussion about it. That is the assumption upon which the answer will be taken.
A. Witness, if all these facts are proved, it is in my view necessary that the responsible commander-in-chief if faced with such a situation takes measures for the protection of his own troop, for the prevention of such brutalities.
Q. Witness, would you call such partisan units which use such kind of warfare. All this, supposing that this is proved, would you call such partisan units a regular army which can claim the protection of a Hague land warfare convention? I am putting the question because-
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: If you put one questions at a time, Dr. Sauter, it may simplify the problem of the witness as well to-
DR. SAUTER: I only want to remind the witness that I am putting this question because during the interrogation of the witness of January 15, 1947, he had uttered an opinion on this.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. You know my question.
A. If a unit acted in violation of the laws of war in a manner as has been stated they don't enjoy the protection of the land warfare convention in my view. I say that without knowing the situation in detail.
Q. Witness, during your interrogation on the 15th of January, 1947, you expressed yourself in a skeptical and negative manner regarding some counter measures like for instance the burning down of villages, the shooting at partisan villages etc. If you had been present in the Balkans during the time of the partisan fighting, and if your troops had been exposed to this kind of warfare, would you then as a responsible army leader in the face of such kind of warfare have considered the most severe measures necessary and would you have used them? Or would you also have-
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Dr. Sauter, I think you have already asked one or two questions. Suppose we be content with the answer of the witness on the portion already asked.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I think that portion of Dr. Sauter's question is wrong on the grounds that any answer would be too speculative on the grounds that it is unclear.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: You may proceed to take the answer to the question.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. Witness, would you kindly answer my last question?
A. Yes, I believe under these circumstances, the commander of a troop which is in such a position as I said should take, and would have to take measures which would protect his troops. He is justified in doing that.
Q. What kind of measures, witness?
A. I don't know, that depends on the situation.
Q. Now take the case where your troop is exposed, constantly according to what I have told you here and what we are going to prove, what would your measures be as a responsible army commander?
A. I would take counter-measures.
Q. How?
A. Well I can't tell you how. I can't answer that because I do not know what my task and what my responsibility and what my position is.
I couldn't do that.
Q. General, would you wait then until your investigations would have established who the perpetrators are?
A. Well, that probably wouldn't always be possible.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Dr. Sauter, it would be a matter of convenience to the Tribunal if you ask questions and don't enter into a controversial discussion with the witness who apparently is doing his level best to tell the situation as he sees it.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. Witness, I will repeat the last question. What would you have done as an army commander in such a situation?
A. I have already said, Mr. Attorney, that I cannot answer this question because I don't know which means would be at my disposal. In every situation, according to my theoretical knowledge, it is quite different.
Q. As commanding general, you can't give us any information.
A. No, this information must be based on a definite situation.
DR. SAUTER: I have no further questions to the witness.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Are there further questions?
BY DR. RAUSCHENBACH:
Q. Dr. Rauschenback for the defendant Foertsch. Witness, when did you leave the Balkans?
A. In May.
Q. In 1941.
A. Yes.
Q. Was there any partisan activity to a greater extent until that time?
A. As far as I know, not.
Q. Did you experience partisan activity on a smaller scale?
A. No, never.
Q. The prosecutor and the interrogator who has been mentioned here have asked you about your views regarding the partisan and the band warfare.
Are those answers only a personal view of yourself?
A. These answers were my personal views and it has been expressed in this manner.
Q. And in your official capacity, you had nothing to do with those questions?
A. No.
Q. When the interrogator asked you, did you have the impression that you were questioned as a kind of military export? Were you questioned about opinions or about facts?
A. The interrogator told mo expressly that because I had been present at various theatres of war, though I had not taken part in partisan warfare, he wanted to hear my personal view, and I have expressed it at that time in those answers.
DR. RAUSCHENBACH: I have no further questions.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Are there further questions on the part of defense counsel? Mr. Fenstermacher?
RE*CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:
Q. If your Honors please, General von Greiffenberg, you must have had some experience with partisans in Russia?
A. Yes.
Q. General, can you conceive of a military situation which would warrant the execution of hostages at the ratio of 100 to 1?
A. I don't know of any such situation.
Q. Can you conceive of a military situation in which it would be necessary to execute hostages at the ratio of 50 to 1?
A. I have no experience in this respect.
Q. I should like to ask you if, as a very experienced man and an old soldier with many years of warfare behind you, whether you could possibly conceive of a military situation being so serious that it would be necessary for you to execute hostages at fixed ratios, say at 50 to 1 or 100 to 1?
A. I can't answer this question like this. That is impossible. I must know the situation and the conditions to do that.
Q. You were asked a few questions regarding the attitude of Fieldmarshal Witzleben and Kluge towards national socialism? You said that Fieldmarshal Witzleben had been killed in connection with the 20th of July, 1944, putsch against Hitler. Was Fieldmarshal Kluge involved in that putsch, do you know?
A. I only know the discussions in the press. I don't know any personal details because I did not talk to Fieldmarshal Kluge.
Q. Is Kluge still alive?
A. No.
Q. Was he executed?
A. No; as far as K know; Kluge committed suicide.
Q. Do you know when?
A. No; I don't know exactly when.
Q. Did you over serve with either Fieldmarshal Witzleben or Kluge?
A. I did not serve under Fieldmarshal von Witzleben; for a time I was subordinate to Fieldmarshal Kluge.
Q. For how long?
A. Just about three months.
Q. You spoke about a regulation stating that army officers had to be qualified from a national socialist standpoint? Are you quite sure that that regulation was not binding until after the attempt upon Hitler's life?
A. I cannot tell you the exact date when this became valid but I only know that an order was issued.
Q. When you were interrogated here in Nurnberg on the 15th of January of this year, I believe you said there was present an interrogator and a stenographer. Was there also present a guard from the prison?
A. I couldn't tell you today. I simply don't know it.
Q. General; I put to you this morning certain questions which were asked of you on that date and certain answers which you gave and I believe you stated that you had been asked those questions and had made those answers, is that correct?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. And I believe I further asked you whether the opinions which you stated on that say were - withdrawn. I believe I asked you whether the opinions which you have today arc the same as those which you expressed on that day and I believe you said they were.
A. Yes, they were theoretical, purely personal views without knowledge of the local conditions.
Q. I would like to submit the Commissar Order to you again, General. This is Exhibit 14 in Document Book 1. Will you turn in the German Document Book to page 35; in the English Document Book page 50, your Honors. General, it states here that this is top secret for general officers only. What does that mean -- for general officers only?
A. I can't find that. Here it says only through offices.
Court No. V, Case No. VII.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I withdraw my question.
DR. LATERNSER : Your Honor, on this occasion I will ask you to make a correction on Page 50 of this document book. On Page 50 it says --- I will put this motion, right now, and we will have a look at the original. I think it is a wrong translation.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: As long as it is a wrong translation we can tell from the original document, and in the meantime I will ask a few other questions.
JUDGE BURKE: Very well, Mr. Fenstermacher, you may proceed.
Q. General, will you turn to page 35 of the German Document Book I. You will note the last paragraph, "You are requested to limit the distribution to Commanders in Chief of Armies or of Air Commands, respectively, and to inform the Junior commanders by work of mouth." What is meant by a "Junior commander"?
A. It doesn't say that here. The text says different.
Q. May I ask you this question, General; it states there in the last paragraph "You are requested to limit the distribution to Commanders in Chief of Armies, and to --
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I will withdraw that question.
I think we will have to wait on this too, Your Honor, until we get the original document.
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honor, it is very regrettable that in such an important matter two very grave mistakes in translation are present.
JUDGE BURKE: We will shortly have a recess and perhaps at that time you may collaborate on the subject matter of the misunderstanding.
Proceed with something else.
Q. General von Greiffenberg, where are you now currently interned?
A. (No response. Witness indicates question not heard).
Q. General von Greiffenberg, where are you currently interned?
A. In Neustadt near Marburg.
Q. And are you well treated there?
A. Yes.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Except for this one matter rerarding the commissar order I have no further questions on this. May we take the recess now?
JUDGE BURKE: Very well. The Tribunal will stand in recess at this time until 3:15.
(Thereupon a 15-minute recess was taken.)
Court No. V, Case No. VII.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
JUDGE BURKE: You may proceed, Mr. Fenstermacher.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Thank you, your Honor. During the intermission, Dr. Laternser and I put our heads together and with the help of the court interpreters have decided upon some new translation terminology for the classification of German documents. If your Honors will turn to Exhibit 13 in Document Book 1 at page 48 a of the English which is page 33a of the German, I would like to give you the following changes:
At the top of page 48a in the English, the words "Top Secret" should be stricken out, as well as the work "Chefsache" and instead the words "Super Top Secret" should be inserted. The words thereafter may stand.
Dropping down to the left the No. 44822/41, after "top secret" should be inserted "super top secret" meaning that this particular order was not only top secret but super top secret as well. Then in the third line of the order after the numbers of the order and after the works "top secret" the word "chefs" should be stricken and the words "super top secret" inserted.
In the second paragraph of the order, the third line, that sentence should now read: "The Commanders and commanding officers be informed orally." The word "Kommandare" should be stricken.
Then if your Honors will turn to page 48b, the next page, which is 33b in the German, at the bottom of the page, your Honors will note the words "Enclosure to OKW/ WEST/ Department" and some numbers. After the words "top secret" there should be inserted the words "super top secret" and the word "Chefs" should be stricken. This is on page 48b, your Honor, Page 50 of the English. Under "Stamp" the word "Chefsache! (Matter for Chiefs only)."
should be stricken and the words "Super Top Secret" inserted. In the line immediately below that line the word "only" should be inserted after the word "transmitted." That takes care of all the changes in Exhibit 13.
If your Honors will turn now to Exhibit 14, which is on page 50 of the English, and page 35 of the German, at the top of the page, after the words "rubber stamp" the word "super " should be inserted. Then at the top left hand corner of the page after the numbers "44822/41 top secret" the words "for general officers only" should be stricken and the words "Super top secret" inserted. Under the words "rubber stamp" just below that portion the words "for general officers only" should be stricken and the words "Super top secret" inserted. In the fourth line of the order after the numbers "44718/41 Top Secret" the words "for General Officers only" should be stricken and the words "Super Top secret" inserted. In the last line of the order the word "Junior" should be stricken before "commanders" and after the word "commanders" the words "and commanding officers" should be inserted.
On the next page 51 of the English Document Book, still page 35 of the German, at the top of the cage on the right hand side the words "for General Officers only" should be stricken and the words "Super Top Secret" added. That is all the corrections on that document.
I think I should ask your Honors to bear these changes in mind in connection with the testimony of yesterday when I was asking the defense witness what it meant when this order was "for general officers only."
JUDGE BURKE: Very well.
JUDGE WENNERSTRUM: Mr. Fenstermacher, perhaps you are not able to answer, but what excuse is there for such translation? How does that happen to get into a record?