Q Witness, there is one exception or one apparent exception, and that is the reprisal order of the 22nd of December 1943, which we shall deal with later. We will omit it for the moment because it only makes matters even more complicated. Instead we will turn to Exhibit 359. It is on Page 94 of the German text and on Page 123 of the English Document Book. It is the Operational Order for the so-called Operation "Panther."
This document is not amongst those which you knew according to your statement at the beginning of the examination, but let us find out what you knew altogether concerning the operation Panther.
A. The initial phases of this operation I did not personally experience because from the 19th of November until the 10th or 11th of December I was not present.
Q. Well then, turn to Document Book XV of the Prosecution. Here again you knew only so few documents at the time when you were in the Southeast that I think I will only submit to you those which you knew. Is it correct that you knew 369 and 370? 369 is on page 45 of the German and 44 of the English text, and 370 is on page 61 of the English text.
A. I did not know 369 and I didn't know 370, not the documents.
Q. Not the documents? But you knew the incidents and the events. How come that at the time you did not get to know any of the documents contained in this book?
A. We are dealing here with reports and correspondence between divisions and corps or at the most between corps and the army which never reached the staff of the army group. It would be a rather strange picture if one imagined that the Supreme authority received all communications which were exchanged in the area. That would be the same as if the Prime Minister of a country receives on his desk all paper work that is ever undertaken in his country.
Q. Witness, concerning Exhibit 370 and 371, contained on page 89 to 96 of the German text and in the English book on page 61 to 72. These exhibits contain amongst others the reproduction of an order which finishes "Signed in draft by Loehr." This is the order of page 12 of the original; it is on page 97 of the German Document Book and it is page 11 of the actual document.
This document deals with questions--it is page 69 of the English Document Book.
It deals with levying of collective fines, It is a communication by the Commander-in-Chief Southeast to the Commanding General and Commander-in-Serbia, Can you by any chance remember this document?
A. No, I cannot remember this document and I do not believe that I have seen it before it was submitted to General Loehr.
Q. And why not?
A. Because this is a matter of administration of which, if I want to be quite frank, I understand just as little today as I did at the time. I do not believe that it would have been submitted to me. It was worked on by Dr. Parisius who was an administrative councillor as it states in the certification. He was senior military administrative councillor and it happened frequently that such matters were carried immediately to the Commanderin-Chief which procedure found my consent and therefore I have no recollection whatsoever of this matter and I do not believe that I have seen it previously at any time.
Q. And now we will deal with the exhibits of Document Book XVI of the prosecution. Here again, according to the survey at the beginning of your examination, you only know a small part of those documents at the time of your activities in the Balkans. They were only the Exhibits 379, 381 and 382. Is it correct that all other documents contained in this document book you only got to know during the course of this trial?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. First of all, we will turn to Exhibit 379. It is on page 98 of the German and 47 of the English text.
These are directives concerning reprisal measures counteracting the communist danger in the Southeast and issued by the Commander-in-Chief Southeast, dated the 22nd of December, 1943. They are the directives which we just discussed when we talked about the parallel position of the Commander-in-Chief Southeast and Military Commander Southeast. To begin with, one preliminary question, this document boars the signature "The Commander-in-Chief, Acting, (Signed) Loehr." Now come that Loehr deputized?
A. Field marshal von Weichs, during those days, around the 22nd of December, was on leave, and his deputy was General Loehr, and this is how the signature "Acting, Loehr" came about.
Q. I want to put one question again which I have put repeatedly in a different context. why did you not sign as deputy of the Commander-in-Chief?
A. I can only repeat that it was quite impossible because I was not his deputy and I could not have been his deputy. I had no command authority. I was considerably younger than the Commander of the subordinate agencies. Therefore, I could not, as deputy of Field marshal Weichs give orders to General Loehr or to General Rendulic, That was impossible.
Q. These directives regarding reprisal measures of the 22nd of December, 1943, start as follows: "The Fuehrer has commanded a unified counteraction against the communist danger in the Southeast with the political leadership of which Minister Neubacher has been charged. The reprisal, penal and revenge measures practiced up to now must in future take into account the new political objectives. The first principle has to be in case of attacks, acts of sabotage, etc.
to seize the perpetrator himself and to take reprisal measures only as a second course, if through reprisal measures the prevention of future attacks is to be expected."
Which was the new political objective which had to be taken into account regarding future actions?
A. One has to put the emphasis on the word "political" just the same as in the sentence which you just read. One has to put the emphasis of the word "political" again because actually it was nothing now and it was nothing new to us soldiers. The only thing that was now was that now finally after almost three years the political leadership of the German Reich understood what the Armed Forces Commander Southeast and the Commander-in-Chief Southeast had continuously said, i.e, next to the necessary military measures, political prerequisites have to be created which are necessary for the pacification of the area. If up till now we merely received the answer, "do not interfere with political affairs," that is none of your business as soldiers," now all of a sudden just like a sudden illumination from above there appeared the alledgedly completely new regulation in the shape of a diplomat. Really it was a very old idea but this new political idea was newly formulated to a certain extant. As far as I remember, the Minister Neubacher, which I do not want to mix up with Neuhaussen--he is Neubacher--he received the order to politically gather all anti-communist forces in the area in order to make them stronger. This is how we must understand this introductionary sentence, to which Neubacher attached particular importance, when drafting the decree.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: At this point, we will take the afternoon recess.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
JUDGE BURKE: You may proceed.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (continued) BY DR. RAUSCHENBACH:
Q. Witness, before the recess I started asking you questions about Exhibit 379, on page 98 of the German, and on page 47 of the English. These are directives of the Commander in Chief Southeast of 22 December 1943, about reprisal measures; the sentence at the beginning of the directives has already been quoted according to which the first principle has to be in the cases of sabotage, attacks to seize the perpetrator himself, and then only to take reprisal measures as a second course. Was that something essentially new?
A. No, for us that wasn't essentially new. It isn't expressed here as something new.
Q. At the beginning of the examination in reply to general questions about the justification of reprisal measures you stated that in your opinion first of all the perpetrator should always be found, but there could quite easily be situations in which the perpetrator could not be caught, but where in order to prevent future attacks persons not involved in the offense had to be used for reprisal measures; and now if the OKW says here that in the first place the perpetrator himself has to be caught, did this also express your opinion?
A. But not that of the OKW.
Q. But that of the Commander in Chief Southeast?
A. Yes, the Commander in Chief Southeast.
Q. Quoting the first sentence in these directives - it seems that these directives go back to a Fuehrer order -- because it says, "The Fuehrer has commanded a unified counter action?"
A. Yes, insofar you are right.
Q. Witness, in the beginning of this document it says that the envoy Neubacher was entrusted with the political leadership; what sphere of activity was envisioned for Neubacher?
A. Neubacher had to cover politically the southeast area, but unfortunately he had no influence on Croatia. That was not under his competency.
Q. Witness, in which respect does this order of the 22 December contain anything essentially new?
A. Principally new was on the second page of the order under "B" , the paragraph according to which the orders which had been issued before with regard to reprisal quotas were to be rescinded. And then newly formulated is also the Paragraph "C" about the decisions, the decisive persons for reprisal measures. This had become necessary, because now the territorial channel was not the same as that of the troop channel, but these two were now parallel. Up to now the executive power and the territorial authority had been with the Commander in Chief Southeast, but now the territorial power and the executive power was in the hands of this newly created office, with Felber at the head, and were subordinate to him, and there had to be a qualification of the authorities for the cases which might arise.
Q. Witness, lets now deal with Paragraph "B"; "Reprisal quotas." Paragraph 1, "Reprisal quotas are not fixed. The orders previously decreed concerning them are to be rescinded. The extent of reprisal measures is to be established in advance in each individual case. " This seems to express what the Commander in Chief Southeast and the former Wehrmacht Commander Southeast in agreement with your opinion in contrast with the OKW had wanted from the very beginning?
A. I have already said the Commander in Chief Southeast had never ordered reprisal quotas; because he didn't think he was in a position so to survey the individual cases, that under individual circumstances and in individual areas he could set down such quotas.
In addition to this the Keitel order of the 16 of September 1941 became invalid.
Q. Did in the meantime the OKW, agree what one should abolish the considerable reprisal quotas?
A. Yes, otherwise we wouldn't have expressed it in this way here.
Q. Did you think it was possible that this change in the attitude of the OKW was based on the representations which had been made so often by the Commander in Chief that at least the OKW gave in?
A. Yes, I think that is very possible.
Q. And please look under "D", Figure 2, which is on page 50 of the English. On page 3 of the original under Figure 2, if such people as are guilty cannot be found, those persons must be resorted to who without being connected with the actual deed nevertheless are to be regarded as co-responsible. Such persons are co-responsible, first of all who profess communism." You will remember Keitel's order according to which hostages were to be taken from all classes of the population, and then to be used for reprisal measures; also those who were members of the Mihajlovic movement. The Mihajlovic followers arc not even mentioned here, only the communists?
A. This can be explained by the fact that Mihajlovic now acted more and more in line with his tendencies against communism.
Q.And is it also expressed under Figure 4, where it reads, under "C" - "Enemies of communism in case they themselves are not concerned with enemy treatment against those persons."
A. That is the same.
Q. And now it was already indicated on the occasion of the new organization of the Command authority in the Southeast in the previous Document Book, that this order of 22 December, this relation with the Commander in Chief Southeast, and Military Commander Southeast became more complicated. Both commanders had to deal with this order, that is, the combatting of the bands, and the reprisal measures.
Now before this order came into being did a discussion take place between the Commander in Chief Southeast and the Military Commander?
A. Several discussions took place between the Commander in Chief Southeast and the Military Commander Southeast and Envoy Neubacher.
Q. Now, please look at Exhibit 381 in the German Document Book 104, and in the English Document Book page 55; this is an order of the 2nd Panger Army dated 13 February 1944, concerning the evacuation of the islands and of the coast in the event of enemy landing; did you know this order at that time?
A. The order came to my staff for information, but I can't say with certainty that I remember it, but it is quite possible that I read it.
Q. Do you know anything about its carrying out?
A. Not that I remember, but I think that its execution, if it was carried out at all in this way, took place after I left the service.
Q. Under Figure 1, paragraph 2 of this order, the assembling of persons from various classes into construction labor companies is envisaged; what have you to say in regard to this?
A. This is quite in order, because this is Croatian State territory, and all these provisions were made in agreement with the Croatian authorities.
Q. Witness, we will now go to the documents in Document Book 17; here I will tell you first all the exhibit numbers of the documents which we have already stated you did not know before. These are Exhibit 412, 413, 414, 417, 420, 421, 422; is it correct that these documents which I have just mentioned were known to you for the first time in this trial?
A. Yes, that is right.
Q. And now your Exhibits 410, 411, 415, which I would like to mention here; Exhibit 410 is on page 37 of the German, and page 52 of the English, Exhibit 411 on page 43 of the German and 58 of the English and Exhibit 415 is on page 50 of the German and 64 of the English.
First of all Document 410 on page 52 of the English contains a report from the Military Commander Southeast to Army Group F, and Document 411 also contains a report on the first two pages from the Commander Southeast to the Army Group F; why did the Military Commander southeast report to Army Group F if he was an equal?
A. The Military Commander Southeast was obliged to report to Army Group F, and for technical reasons this form was chosen, so that version did not have to be established for the same thing. It was much more simple for the Military Commander southeast if he recorded the events in his area in one report, which went to our office and other offices as well.
Q. Witness, Now to Exhibit 415 on page 50 of the German and page 64 of the English. From this exhibit it can be seen that the Commander in Chief Southeast himself passed on reports about reprisal measures to the OKW. Now you told me before that the Military Commander Southeast, as far as reprisal measures was concerned, was not subordinate to the Commander in Chief Southeast; how do you account for this?
A. Our reports included the most important events in the area. Today or yesterday a large number of reports were mentioned by you which concern the Italian occupied area, and also their reprisal measures, commitments to concentration camps, mopping up measures, etc.
Q. Have you read the reports of the Military Commander Southeast, which went to the Commander-in-Chief Southeast?
A. In any case they were reported to me, if I didn't read them myself. In any case I knew about them.
Q. And what was reported; what was reported to you?
A. The most important part of the reports.
Q. And was that for you?
A. In the first place of course the tactical factors, because the military commander Serbia was subordinate to us in that respect.
Q. Also the reprisal measures?
A. The reprisal measures were also reported to me, in any case certainly the most important ones.
Q. And who ordered the reprisal measures?
A. They were ordered by the Military Commander Southeast, Felber.
Q. Did Felber make inquiry with you before these reprisal measures were ordered or with the Commander in Chief Southeast?
A. With me, not at all, and as to the Commander in Chief, the Field Marshall von Weichs, as far as I know was not, because this wasn't necessary.
Q. In Exhibit 410 and 411 there are also orders of the military Commander Southeast signed Felber; did you know these orders?
A. No, of course I didn't know the orders. They went from Felber to his subordinate offices.
Q. These offices were not subordinate to the Commander in Chief Southeast?
A. No, the Administrative sub-area Headquarters, the local headquarters were only subordinate to the Military Commander Serbai.
DR. RAUSCHENBACH: Your Honor, it has just been pointed out that mistake in the translation has been made in the testimony of the witness, when he seated "vortragen", "Molden", informieren, The word "report" is always used.
I think the difference doesn't come out in this way. You said witness, for instance, that the reports of the Military commander were partly orally reported to you.
A. "vortragen" means that they are told to me orally, summarized, partly with the actual text. This is an oral report.
JUDGE BURKE: Does this clarify the situation pointed out?
DR. RAUSCHENBACH: I am satisfied.
Q. Witness, in Exhibit 416, there is an order of the Military Commander Southeast to the German Plenipotentiary General in Croatia about the recruiting of labor; in Croatia 3,000 workers were recruited, did you receive this order?
A. This went to the Quartermaster General of my staff, but I probably didn't now about it. The recruiting of labor in Croatia is completely legal.
Q. Why?
A. Because it is a recruiting, and here it talks about payment, and providing the workers with food, and providing of the families, etc. and in addition this certainly happened with the agreement of the Croatian Government.
Q: And Croatians were recruited?
A: Yes.
Q: Witness did you know the daily reports of the military commander Southeast to the Commander in Chief Southeast, which are contained in exhibit 418 on page 77 of the English document book. So that you see the complete document, I will submit the original to you.
(The document is handed to the witness)
Were the reports made in this form at that time and did you see them as you see them now in the document book?
A: These reports in the original here and also the photostat copy have no signature nor initials, therefore I don't know whether they were actually presented in that form or whether they were first drafts or something like that. There is an initial on some of them but no sender is mentioned, therefore I cannot say any more about it apart from the fact that part of the report falls within the period of my absence.
Q: In these reports the case of Kalavrita is mentioned. This gives also the reprisal measures following it; can you remember this incident?
A: Yes, the incident of Kolavrita, the attack and murder of German soldiers and the begin of the corresponding counter measures took place while I was absent, but I remember that when I returned an inquiry was made but I really don't know why and what the contents were.
Q: And what was the reason, according to your knowledge, for these reprisal measures of Kolavrita?
A: The reason was the murder of between 70 and 80 German soldiers, that is of about one whole company.
Q: Exhibit 419 German page 75, English page 104, this contains a service regulation for the Higher SS and Police leader in Greece; did you know this service regulation?
It is dated 7 September 1943 and came from the Chief of the O.K.N.
A: It is possible that I knew this service regulation but I was not interested in it as the Higher SS and Police leader was in no way subordinate to the Commander in Chief Southeast.
Q: To whom then was the Higher SS and Police leader in Greece subordinated?
A: He was subordinate himself to the Military Commander of Greece. I don't know the detailed conditions, but I am convinced it was the same as in Serbia and that he too in essence had his direct channel to Himmler, but that is only an assumption.
Q: What does it mean that the Higher SS and Police Leader in Greece for himself was subordinate to the Military Commander in Greece?
A: Well, I cannot say in detail because I don't know anything about the detailed conditions of subordination of the Higher SS and Police leader.
Q: Did you know the Higher SS and Police Lender in Greece at that time?
A: No, I knew his name, I never saw him. I only met him for the first time in the Dachau camp.
Q: Now under exhibit 423, this is German page 89 and English page 123, "Basic Orders for the O.K.W." Did you receive them at that time.
A: Yes, I certainly knew these orders.
Q: Do they bring anything essentially knew about the question of combatting the bands?
A: No, this only says that troop commanders in those areas on application could be given executive power, that is executive power can be transferred from the territorial offices to the troop offices in case of large scale fighting or in the case of enemy landings.
Q: Therefore in the case of the Commander in Chief Southeast this would have meant that the Executive power of the Military Commander Southeast would then go over to the Commander in Chief Southeast?
A: No, that is not necessarily meant because here this possibility is considered for within individual territories as Albania and Montenegro, but as far as I know during my time suck a case never occurred because no landing or fighting took place in the sense of this order.
Q: And now we will go on to document book 18 of the prosecution. First of all I repeat the numbers of those exhibits which according to you list you did not know at that time and saw for the first time in this trial. These are Nos. 424, 425, 426, 431, 436, 437 and 441; is that correct?
A: Yes, I did not know these.
Q: And now turn to exhibit 432 on page 12 of the English document book and compare them with exhibits 433 and 434. These are daily reports of the Military Commander Southeast to Army Group F; did you know these?
A: Yes, I possibly knew these reports.
Q: Then why did they go to the Army Group F, to the Military Commander.
A: For the same reason mentioned before.
Q: Now would you please repeat briefly the reasons?
A: As Military Commander of Serbia with regard to questions of the securing of the country was subordinate to the commander in Chief Southeast as Military Commander Southeast, that is as territorial commander for the whole of the area, he was obliged to report to the Commander in Chief Southeast.
Q: Please take exhibit No. 435, page 22 of the English document book, page 26 in the German. These are daily reports to Army Group F; did you know all these reports too?
A: No, if I knew them at all then. I knew only the reports on page 1 because the other reports fall within the period after my service in the Southeast.
Q: When did you leave the Southeast?
A: On the 5th of March.
Q: And the year?
A: 1944.
Q: And where did you go to?
A: I had to prepare for the entry of the German troops into Hungary.
Q: And you did not go back again to the Southeast?
A: Only to fetch my baggage and to say goodbye, but after this time I did not do any work anymore, in the Southeast area.
Q: And who was you successor?
A: My successor was General Winter.
Q: And had General Winter already deputized for you before?
A: He deputized for me. He started his deputizing a few days after the 5th of March but with the certainty that he would be my successor, because it had already been stated very clearly to me that I would not return and as of the 15th of March I was officially taken from that office.
Q: In Hungary did you receive knowledge of the events in the Balkans?
A: No, apart from perhaps individual talks I had with officers of the staff who were passing, but no official knowledge. 4391
Q: What about the reports contained in exhibit 437, page 32 of the English document book?
A: Exhibit 437, here the first reports happened after my time and the others are reports which also did not go to the Commander in Chief Southeast, that in they could not have possibly come to my knowledge.
Q Witness, now to the next prosecution document book, Document Book XIX; first of all, those exhibits -- that is, the documents from which you had no knowledge during your activities in the Southeast -according to your list, those are exhibits 445, 446, 448, 450, 452, 453, 454, 455, 456 and 457. Are those the correct numbers?
A Yes, those are the correct ones.
Q Now, please take Exhibit No. 447, German Book page 10, English page 17; what kind of reports are these?
A These are excerpts from reports of the Commander in Chief Southeast to the OKW and /or the OKH. They always had the same text. Of course, I knew these reports with the exception of the days when I was absent.
Q Are these reports reproduced in their entirety in the document book?
A No, I have already said they are excerpts. They have the same mutilations about which a have frequently spoken before.
Q Is the same the case in Exhibit 449 in German Document Book page 35 and the following pages and in the English document book page 37 and the pages following?
A Yes, that's the same.
Q This contains a report of the 27th of June 1943 and this is an excerpt from page 30 of the original. In the German document book it is page 12 of the copy which is in the document book; it is page 43 of the English, there is a report and the last sentence reads: "Enemy dropped explosive fountain pens." Were these kind of reports frequent?
A Yes, these kind of reports often came in but I can't give the number.
Q. And then to the report of the Commander in Chief Southeast dated the 14th of the 7th, 1943: This is an excerpt from page 59 of the original, on page 49 of the English document book. In the last paragraph there it says: "Many surprise attacks and forced deliveries of food. Sixty Communists were shot for shooting at German hospital train and sabotage on line Lescovac-Ladenovac Daily reports for 15 and 20 June.
Was this an exceptional case, that hospital trains were shot at?
A No, such cases happened frequently. I also remember that -I think in the Peloponnesus -- a column of the Swiss Red Cross was attacked and plundered.
Q And in the report -- the one after the next -- of the Commander in Chief Southeast dated 18th of July 1943 it states on page 50 of the English Document Book under the last paragraph: "Italian occupied territory: During operation in Yokovo Mountains. 463 band suspects were arrested and brought to a concentration camp." Who ordered these arrests?
A I don't know in detail but an Italian office -- this was Italian occupied territory and the sovereignty of the Italians was maintained even if possibly later on for a certain time there was a tactical subordination.
Q But that was before the Italians fell off?
A Yes, yes, because then it wasn't occupied any more.
Q And what sort of concentration camp was this?
A This could only be a concentration camp set up by the Italians.
Q Now, please take the daily report of the Commander in Chief Southeast dated the 26th of the 7th, 1943, on page 65 of the German, page 54 of the English. There is states under figure "2":
"According to reliable sources, DM has instructed his subordinate leaders in Boznia and Dalmatia on the 26th of the 7th to carry out the following operations immediately in case expected insurrection in Italian army takes place: disarming of all Italian units, distribution of Italian weapons to DM units, recruiting of Jugoslavian in force personnel, later destruction of all traffic roads, occupation of the towns and mopping up operations in coastal area, internment of captured Italians and treatment according to International Martial Law."