Court No. V, Case No. VII.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Courtroom will please find their seats.
The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: Mueller-Torgow representing General Felmy. Your Honors, I would like to see my client excused from the sessions of Tuesday and Wednesday for the purpose of preparing his case.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Very well. You may proceed, Mr. Rapp.
CROSS-EXAMINATION (Continued) DEFENDANT VON GEITNER BY MR. RAPP:
Q Witness, before the recess, you stated that the legality of these orders was never doubted by your headquarters inasmuch as they had come to you from the OKW. Is that right?
A Yes, it is. We were of the opinion that anything that came from the UKW had been examined so thoroughly that the legality could never be doubted.
Q Did your Commanding General ever discuss the legal issues involved with his legal adviser?
A I am sure that he did that. When I arrived, the orders had long been in existence, and all these matters were already in the process of being carried out.
Q Do you know whether or not in each instance he consulted his legal adviser?
A Whom do you mean by "legal adviser?"
Q I mean his legal adviser. There was, I understand, a type of staff judge-advocate attached to your headquarters. Is that correct?
A There was attached to the agency of the Military Commander a small court martial, that is correct. Whether he ever consulted this court martial counselor I do not know because I had no contact with matters of a court martial nature.
Q Witness, I understand that. I was not talking about court martials as such. I was talking about whether or not you knew that he Court No. V, Case No. VII.
had talked to his legal adviser about the legality of these execution orders in each instance as they were ordered?
AAs far as I know, he discussed the matter in every individual instance with the expert you mentioned who worked on the matter and this expert also would be a legal man.
Q Witness, to come hack to the shadow executions, I understood you to say that before they could be put into practice, some kind of an understanding had been reached with the SD. Is that correct?
A Before this matter was introduced, the Military Commander had to confer with the Commander of the S.D. that is correct. The individual cases were only known to the Military Commander and to the Commander of the SD. Not even I knew about it.
Q I understood you further to say that to even approach Meyssner in connection with your contemplated shadow execution was considered impossible by your Commanding General, is that right?
A You are talking about alleged shadow shootings. They were not only alleged shadow shootings; they were an actual fact. They were carried out. Meyssner could not be approached in this matter.
Q I didn't say "angeblich." I said "contemplated."
Witness, will you explain very briefly, if you can, why a representative of Meyssner's office had to be called into the Commanding General's confidence, why you couldn't do it by yourselves. I just wanted to have that once more crystallized.
A Only a very small circle could know about these things. This small circle of people could only exist in Belgrade. In Belgrade, as far as I remember, the Military Commander could only have executions ordered and executed by the SD--that is, according to my memory. I may be mistaken. The Commander had taken confidence to Schaefer up to a point. When Meyssner was on leave, Schaefer showed a tendency towards moderation more so than Meyssner. For that reason, he asked this man to come to confer with him, and he discussed matters with him. I don't even know how this whole thing was initiated. I believe the first dis Court No. V, Case No. VII.
cussion took place on the 28th of May according to the War Diary, that was the first discussion where I was present too and that was long after Schaefer had been with the Commander.
Q Witness, did the dual channel system of reporting--that is one channel through the SD to Himmler and another channel through your Heeresgruppe to the OKW-have anything to do with the fact that General Bader wanted to cover both tracks?
AAs far as I remember, and I believe I am fairly accurate here, General Bader only had one channel for his daily reports. This channel went to the Commander-in-Chief Southeast.
Q Witness, I realize that, but what I meant--there was also another channel which was in charge of Meyssner or Schaefer which General Bader did not control. Is that right?
A Yes, that is correct. There were even more channels than that.
Q Let's just confine ourselves to these two I have at the present time selected for discussion. And I therefore ask you whether or not one of the reasons Schaefer was called into Bader's confidence was the fact that Bader was afraid, possibly afraid, a different reporting through the SS channels may embarrass him? And expose his scheme? Do you think that there was another reason?
A It was certainly not the main reason. I believe that the main reason was the confidence which Bader had in Schaefer and in this confidence it was included that Schaefer would not report any differently. That is what I assume.
Q In other words, witness, would you say without Schaefer's knowledge of your plans and his agreement to cooperate with your Commanding General, your scheme would have been hopeless from the beginning. Is that what you want to say, witness? Or at least very difficult?
A In any case, that seemed the only possible way to the Commander.
Court No. V, Case No. VII.
Q Witness, according to your own testimony, you described this Dr. Schaefer and I quote your own testimony now. "A man who took an entirely different position towards the Serbian people than Meyssner. He was not a true party member. He was an old criminal police official, holding the rank of an Qberregierungsrat who had complete legal training which was usually uncommon among SD leaders. He was opposed to Meyssner. The Commanding General took this man into his confidence and received his concurrence." Did you make that statement, witness?
A Yes, I have.
Q You knew Dr. Schaefer personally, witness?
A Yes, I did.
Q Did you ever discuss with Schaefer racial problems--that is, for instance, Schaefer's attitude toward the Reich's policy in connection with the Jews? Did you ever talk to him about that?
A Not that I remember.
Q In appraising Schaefer's character and personality, based on your own judgment, would you consider Schaefer of being capable of committing criminal and inhuman action against Jews?
A You said that I emphasized Schaefer's character here. I contrasted Schaefer's character with that of Meyssner's and I put in contrast his attitude towards the Serbian population to that of Meyssner. He had a completely different attitude towards the Serbian population.
Q Just one second, witness. I didn't say that you praised Schaefer. I merely quoted what you said about him. If you yourself want to deduce from such quotations that you yourself appraised him that is all right with me. I just wanted to have that straight. Now continue.
A You mentioned the word "appraised". What Schaefer did prior to that date or what he did without it being reported to the Commanding General is not known to me. He was in any case an SS leader and an SD leader. In any case, he did not take me into his confidence.
Q Witness, it becomes incumbent that you either make one state Court No.V, Case No. VII.
mant or the other. I was quoting you what you said about Dr.Schaefer, I believe last Friday. On the basis of this character analysis which you gave, I asked you whether or not in your judgment this man was capable of committing crimes and inhuman acts against the Jaws?
A I don't know that.
Q Very well then. Do you know whether or not during the time that you were in Balgrada, Schaefer was involved in the extermination of Jaws in Balgrade. Do you know about that?
AAt the time when I was in Belgrade, I did not hear anything about the extermination of Jews. That never happened during my tenure in Balgrada. There was never any talk about it.
Q Witness, that was the territory of the SD about which you had no knowledge. Is that correct?
A We were not to have any knowledge about this. When the Highest SS and Polica Leader was assigned to his post, it was expressly stated that he had to work with secret police methods.
Q Witness, I am now showing you a document. Your Honors, this is 501-PS. It is being submitted as Prosecution Exhibit 599. In order to throw some true light on the character of this Dr. Schaefer who cooperated with your Commanding General in the so-called shadow executions, I have handed you now a document which deals with the extermination of Jaws through gas wagons. That is to say, Jews were harded into the back of these vans and exterminated through the poison gases. Will you read this document once?
A Do you want me to read it out loud?
Q You don't have to read it all aloud. We will go over it anyhow. The German copy of this original, as now in the hands of defense counsel, may not be complete but it will be in a few minutes. The English copy is complete.
Now, witness, you will see for yourself that these are various letters and telegrams addressed to the Reichssicharheitshauptamt talking about the repair and additional equipment needed in connection with Court No. V, Case No. VII.
these gas vans, and somewhere towards the end of this communication, you will find a telegram signed by Dr. Schaefer and sent from Belgrade. Have you found that telegram, witness?
A Yes, I have. Yes, I have got the telegram here. It is signed by Schaefer Obersturmbannfuehrer.
Q And you also will note that the major to whom this telegram is addressed happened to work in the same office that the original letter on top of this document I have shown you was also addressed to. In other words, it leaves very little question that he is talking in this telegram about special missions, meaning exterminations, in connection with these gas vans and that he is now sending them to Berlin to have them repaired, All I wanted to prove to you, witness, is the fact that whether you knew it or not, this Dr. Schaefer was involved in the extermination of Jews in Belgrade. He was, in fact, the same Dr. Schaefer which you have told the Court agreed with your Commanding General in carrying out these mock executions and was opposed to Meyssner and was not a Nazi of the old line. Is there anything you wanted to say in connection with this document?
A This is something completely new to me. The dates mentioned in these documents lie before my time. I never heard anything about these things. During the time of my tenure, I never gained any knowledge concerning the facts that Jews were shot in Belgrade or should I say Jews were exterminated in that area. It is possible that that happened at an earlier date but I have never heard anything and I never knew anything of these gas vans and similar things.
Court No. V, Case No. VII.
Q You said that the purpose of showing you this document was primarily to tie up Dr. Schaefer with Jewish extermination, do you understand that?
A Yes, I understand.
Q Witness, there is a marked discrepancy between your testimony and the testimony of General Felber-
JUDGE BURKE: I think that is scarcely the method to pursue in cross-examination. If this witness has testified to other statements of facts on other occasions and now is testifying to another statement of facts, you have a right to interrogate on that. The other method is not recognized as a proper method of cross-examination.
Q Witness, General Felber, as a witness before this Tribunal, stated that he himself was the "father", so to speak or "father of the thought", of these shadow executions, and that they did not commence prior to October 12, 1943. This statement of General Felber can be found in the court transcript of August 11, on page 1721. You stated that these shadow executions were instituted by General Bader, and commenced sometime later in May or the beginning of June; will you explain to us the difference in these two statements?
A I do not know any more exactly when these shadow shootings had commenced. I had heard of them already before General Felber made statements, and I was quite aware of that fact here. I arrived only at the correct date in reading the War Diary and in the War Diary it says quite clearly, "Shadow shootings", and on the basis of reading that I remembered that was the first time this occurred.
Q And when was that, witness?
A It was on the 28 and 29 of May 1942.
Q How do you explain the fact, General Felber moved it back to October 12, 1943, and claimed the authorship of this scheme, inasmuch as you were at that time without interruption the Chief of Staff to both offices?
A I don't know. In any case the problem already played an im Court No. V, Case No. VII.
portant part by the end of May 1942. It is possible that after Meyssner returned it was pushed into the background, but there is no doubt already at that date, in May 1942, these things occurred.
Q Witness, you said that in order to make shadow executions successful so-called central executions had to be carried out in Belgrade, is that right?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q And those central executions in Belgrade took place, if I understand you correctly, in spite of the fact that the alleged acts of sabotage for which these executions were a reprisal measure, occurred several dozen or a hundred kilometers away from Belgrade, is that right?
A Yes, that is correct, but several hundred kilometers.....
Q Some distance?
A Yes, some distance.
Q In other words, would you say that many people were executed in Belgrade, who had no personal knowledge of acts which occurred somewhere else; they did not participate in them and of course they could not prevent them, is that right?
A That may be correct. The prisoners might have been selected according to the order of the Commander from the circles where the perpetrators originated. If possible people were selected who came from the district where the sabotage acts, etc. had occurred.
Q In your testimony you further say that such central executions took place only after the local Feldkommandanten run short in numbers of reprisal prisoners or hostages who were in their local jails, is that right?
A That is the way the commander ordered it.
Q Now, isn't it true, witness, that more often than not these jails were filled to capacity?
A I don't know that. I had no connection with that.
Q There was no report system at your headquarters whereby the Feldkommandanten had to report to you what their actual strength Court No. V, Case No. VII.
was, that is their own troops or those they held from the enemy for purposes of rations, supplies and other things?
A I cannot remember that I received any reports concerning the strength of the reprisal camps.
Q You would admit, wouldn't you, that it is quite important as a food problem for any quartermaster to know how many people he has to feed, or did these prisoners have to supply themselves?
A I don't know the facts precisely, but I believe that the reprisal prisoners had to be supplied by the Serbian authorities. I cannot remember exactly how the order was worded. Besides I was only interested in the supply situation of the troops, not of the reprisal prisoners.
Q Did you care what the people you held got to eat, if anything?
A I would like to refer back to the order. I believe the supply was a matter of the Serbian authorities.
Q Witness, how long were these shadow executions carried out, that is to say until to which date, approximately?
A I don't know that, because I was not informed concerning these facts and concerning the individual cases.
Q Weren't such facts apparent from the War Diary?
A In the War Diary it is only stated that on the 23 May certain shadow shootings took place, and that is reported as a fact, I don't know how often that occurred, and when that occurred, because that was merely a matter between the military commander and Schaefer.
Q Witness, did you ever hear of an instance whereby the local Feldkommandanten ordered immediate reprisal measures on the spot and got General Bader's and General Felber's agreement ex post facto?
A I do not remember any such an incident.
Q. Would you consider it possible?
A In accordance with the orders which were given this should be impossible.
Q Did at any time the SD or the military units which were Court No. V, Case No. VII.
affected through these acts of sabotage send representatives to any of these executions, to see to it that they were properly carried out?
A I don't know that.
Q You never heard of any such instance?
A Not that I remember.
Q Witness, you stated that the SD usually selected the execution victims, is that correct?
AAs far as I know the basic order of General Felber states that I believe the local headquarters Commandants, the police and also the Serbian District Superintendents, who had certain lists concerning these people had to participate in the selection.
Q: Do you know what methods the S.D. used in order to be sure that they selected the right people?
A: I don't know that. The S.D. never informed us concerning these facts.
Q: Did your commanding officer or his or you ever supervise and check on the S.D. that these blank instructions, which your commanding general gave, were carried out properly by the S.D.?
A: The right to check up police measures was not given to any armed forces commander and whether in any particular instance my commander ever did it, I did not know. I never had the audacity to do that.
Q: You have gotten a little bit off the track. It is clear that your commanding general delegated tne authority to select reprisal prisoners to the SD; is that correct? Originally it was his prerogative?
A: When I arrived in Belgrade there had been an order of the commander, I believe it was dated the winter of 19411942, according to which order the S.D. was to be consulted when band prisoners were taken, besides the police was commissioned by their chief, Himmler, to undertake tne police security measures in Serbia. The police never informed us and at least did not inform me how many prisoners they made on these occasions.
Q: Witness, you clearly recognize do you not that the selection of reprisal prisoners is an integral part of the entire reprisal measures scheme and that your commanding entire was the one and only man who could order reprisal measures; is that correct?
A: Yes, it is.
Q: Consequently, it is correct is it not that your commanding general at all times exercised supervision over the selection of reprisal prisoners even if he did not choose to invoke such prerogatives; is that correct?
A: Yes, it is. I would assume that he would have the necessary confidence in those agencies whom he had given the order.
Q: Witness, you said that reprisal measures contributed to a great extent actually even prevented the outbreak of an organized revolt in Serbia; is that correct?
A: Yes, they did contribute.
Q: Isn't it true that more and better troops, more and better equipment would have been a more effective way to combat a threatening revolt?
A: Reprisal measures were directed against the surprise attacks and sabotage acts, etc. My commander maintained that quality and quantity of the troops had to be of a better standard in order to make the population respect the occupying forces, moreover if that had been the case the surprise attacks and other incidents would nave possibly not occurred and thus the reprisal measures would have been superfluous. That is now the situation actually was. It is not that even if more troops had been present, reprisal measures would have been superfluous, that is not proper. The actual fact was is better troops, German troops, had been present it might have been possible to strengthen the authority of the occupation forces to the extent that the surprise attacks would not occur.
Q: Witness, you testified that from the middle of 1943 on allied planes, doth during the night and the day supplied the Tito and Mihajlovic forces with weapons, uniforms, supplies, ammunition and the like; did you say that?
A: Yes, I did, but I don't t ink I said it was only as of the middle of 1945, it was much earlier.
I don't know, I cannot say when it started. I believe it was as early as the winter of 1942-1945.
Q: That would move it back to the winter of 1942-1045. - in connection with this statement you went on to say that had such supplies by the Allies not come into existence and had they not reached the Tito and Mihajlovic forces, the letter would have died a natural death; did you make a statement to that effect?
A: Yes, I think I expressed myself in a similar manner and that above all applied to the Mihajlovic movement.
Q: Witness, did it ever occur to you or your commanding general that it would have been much more effective to get more anti-aircraft guns, to get more fighter planes to shoot down these Allied planes, rather than to wage a war of terror and intimidation against the civilian population?
A: Those two tings had nothing to do with each other. We vary often tried to get fighter planes, they however were never there when they were even more necessary than in Serbia. Our air force was always short of personnel and equipment. We would have very much liked to have planes if we only could have gotten some, but we could not.
Q: But you don't think, if I understand you correctly, that this increase in planes and guns and manpower would nave had any bearing on the reprisal measures which you were forced to institute?
A: Ye would have had to have an air force which would have been so enormously strong as it never existed in the whole of Germany. It is well-known that isolated flights cannot ever be prevented, especially not at night time and that is quite impossible from the point of view of anti-aircraft defense.
The dropping of equipment had the purpose of supporting an open insurrection and it was also to serve for explosive sabotage acts on railway lines, etc.
Q: Witness, what would have happened to General Felber or General Bader if the OKW had found out by chance that these daily reports, which you were sending up there, were mere frauds, as far as the execution of hostages were concerned; what would have happened to these two officers?
A: Only frauds? I think that is going too far.
Q: By confining my statement merely to the number of people executed or the number of people not executed in connection with the so-called shadow measures, you admit they were fraudulent?
A: These reports were not correct. I am convinced that my commanders would have been put before a court martial if anything had been found out.
Q: Witness was there anybody at your Headquarters who was in charge of keeping the true figures of the execution as distinguished from those which you reported to higher headquarters; in other words if the commanding general at a moment's notice wanted to know how many people he had executed up to a certain period, whom would he consult inasmuch as the reports were all faked?
A Not all the reports wore faked. To the best of my knowledge, on the military commander knew what was true and what was not true.
Q We are not now concerned with the fact who know or who didn't know whether these reports were accurate or not accurate. I am merely asking you whether there was any single individual at your headquarters who could provide your Commanding General with the necessary information that is, the accurate information as distinguished from one which you reported to higher headquarters in connection with reprisal measures. There was no log kept?
A I don't believe there was anyone. I think that only the Military Commander would be in a position to do that. Even I didn't know anything about it.
Q Well, the mere fact that you didn't know it doesn't prove anything because you already have stated that you had nothing to with it. Is that right?
A I didn't say that I had nothing at all to do with it because, after all, I participated in the basic discussion. Only the Military Commander reserved the right to himself as far as I know.
Q Would you know by any chance the ratio between real executions and mock executions approximately?
A No, I wouldn't. I have told you that mock executions we could only execute concerning matters which were dealt with in Belgrade centrally.
Q Witness, you stated that many inaccuracies and mistakes had occurred in connection with the keeping of your war diary at your headquarters. Is that right?
A I did not say that. In my affidavit which had not yet been accepted as an exhibit it says -
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Just a minute. If the testimony of the witness is of sufficient importance to make a record, perhaps, it should be translated as he goes on. If you will advise the witness please to await the opportunity of the translator, the interpreter, it would be a more intelligent record.
Q Will you please speak slowly?
A Will you please tell me there I have said anything like that?
Q Very well.
A In the affidavit which has not yet been submitted something is contained concerning these facts and the assertion there refers back to the war diary of the 704th Division and I am stating a few examples but I am not referring myself to my own war diary.
MR. RAPP: Your Honors, I have just made reference to these two affidavits which I wanted to cover during this cross examination in. order to avoid having to go over them again. However, in view of the testimony of the witness, I will drop this particular phase at this time inasmuch as the affidavit is as yet not known to the Tribunal.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: But you wish to reserve your right to continue examination? I think it was agreed with Dr. Sauter this morning that would be all right.
MR. RAPP: That's right your Honor.
THE WITNESS: I have said that it is possible that discrepancies are contained in the war diaries, that it is also possible that there may be inexact reports. I did not say, however, that there were many such things contained in the war diaries. In the next sentence I said that this is the case, for instance, concerning the war diaries of the 704th Infantry Division which later became the 104th Rifle Battalion.
MR. RAPP: Your Honors, may I move that this portion of the witness's testimony in answer to my last question, in view of the statement I have made previously, be stricken from the record?
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Well, the Tribunal will reserve judgment on it until such cross examination as you may desire to offer may obviate any possible objection to it.
MR. RAPP: Very well.
Q Witness, were there any units of the Einsatzstab Rosenberg attached to your headquarters?
A I don't remember anything of that kind at the moment. I believe it was only here that I learned anything about this Einsatzstab Rosenberg.
Q Consequently, you do or did not know what they were doing?
A No, I didn't know that.
Q Just to refresh your memory, witness, I will now hand you NOKW-1441, Prosecution Exhibit 600. Now, there is a -- just a second, witness, if you please. There is a here a letter signed in your name for the Commanding General Serbia giving under paragraph 6 certain references and it states here:
"In addition, the Office Special Detachment Reichsleiter Rosenberg, Einsatzstab Southeast, is reported. Strength of the Detachment: 9 people. No exact data is available here."
Now, attached to this letter, if you please, you will find a copy of a copy and it says on top there:
"Enclosure 2) To Commanding General and Commander in Serbia Ia No. 1068/43 secret 29 March 1943" and what they were doing is explained in the body of this communication:
"The fight against Jews and Freemasons as well as against the powers which are ideologically allied with them is a high priority task of National Socialism during the war?
And then it outlines their duties. It says:
"Searching of public libraries and archives and of the chancelries of the High Church authorities as well as of Freemasons lodges and Jewish associations for political material directed against the Reich and having such material confiscated, and so forth."
From this information it seems to clearly indicate that you at that time had certain liaison knowledge what this Rosenberg unit was doing. Is that right, witness?
A Yes, but I didn't remember it any more. It slipped my mind.
Q Witness, do you recall whether or not captured partisans were evacuated to Norway?
A Whether or not it happened I do not know. In any case, in March 1942 there were some orders which said that prisoners captured during partisan combat actions were to be deported to spheres of German interests and this was to be effected by the Higher and SS Police Leader.
Q And then, I assume, a German sphere of interest as Norway could be included as part of that last?
A I would assume that, yes.
Q Witness, to the best of your knowledge did the defendant Kuntze ever protest to General Bader about reprisal measures the way General Bader carried them out? Do you know about that or not?
A I do not remember that he protested but I do remember that at the time of my arrival in Belgrade I was told that General Kuntze had decreased the ratio figures. That is what I was told.
Q Did Field Marshal Weichs ever protest to General Felber about the reprisal measures the way he carried them out?
A I do not know anything concerning a protest. All I know is that Field Marshal von Weichs endeavored to regulate these matters in a different way and that he and Felber agreed on these points.
MR. RAPP: Your Honors, I have no further questions for crossexamination at this time.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Very well, the Tribunal will stand adjourned until tomorrow morning at nine-thirty.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 23 October 1947, at 0930.)
Official Transcript of Military Tribunal V, Case VII, in the matter of the United States of America against Wilhelm List et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany on 28 October 1947, 0930 hours, Judge Wennerstrum, presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Courtroom 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.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, will you ascertain if all the defendants are present in the Courtroom?
THE MARSHAL: May it please, Your Honor, all the defendants are present in the Court room, except the defendant Felmy who has been excused and the defendant Von Weichs, who is in the hospital.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any further direct examination?
DR. LATERNSER: May it please the Tribunal, I have been asked to announce the following to the Tribunal, I have been informed that the cells in the prison have not been heated up to today. That is very difficult for the defendants and makes their preparation of their defense difficult for them. I wanted to inform the Tribunal of this fact so that something can be done about it.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal, Dr. Laternser, will report your suggestions and your comments to the proper authorities. We are conscious of the fact that we nave no authority over the condition of the jail, but as interested members of this Tribunal, we will report it for the consideration of the proper authorities.
Is there any further direct examination, Dr. Sauter?
REDIRECT EXAMINATION Defendant Curt Ritter von Geitner (Resumed.)
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. May I please put a few questions to the defendant von Geitner?
Witness did you personally participate in any fights against the bands?
A. Twice I had an opportunity through my military commander to observe band fights from very close quarters.
Q. Did you observe anything special on those occasions, which moved you and impressed you particularly, especially concerning the method of warfare used by the partisans?
A. The first time or the first occasion was during the first days of July 1943, the locality was Zwornik on the river Drina. This locality was endangered ny the Tito bands. The German General in Croatia had asked us to occupy a bridge-head there. We did not have the forces to do that and General Bader refused to do it. He sent me down there, to see how the land lay. I arrived there during the hours of the morning, together with the commander of the sector. We approached the forest border near Zwornik, which is on the eastern bank of the River Drina. The mountain heights near Zwornik were occupied by Reds. Colonel Neumann and myself had to enter the locality of Zwornik, I beg your pardon, not Zwornik. We had to enter the positions of a Russian company on the eastern bank of the Drina opposite Zwornik. That was a diffucult task, because the road was under constant fire. We had hardly reached this Russian position when terrific firing started. I say at a distance of about 100 meters that the occupiers of Zwornik, amounted to about one company of Domobrans and those were members of the Croatian armed forces, crossed the bridge fleeing toward the Serbian bank of the River.
Tito's forces, which were on the mountain heights in the immediate vicinity of the town, started to fire for all they were worth on those Serbian soldiers and the Croatian soldiers who were followed by parts of the population, women, men and children and the Reds shot into these masses of people in the same way as they had shot into the columns of the Croatian soldiers. The bridge and the eastern bank of the river presented a horrible picture. Zwornik was then occupied by the Reds and there was a continuous fire battle with the Russians.