"Number 13, Exceeding the number of machine guns, et cetera, permitted."
Remarks: "Can be made light of."
"Number 18: Construction of U-boat parts." This remark is quite characteristic:
"Difficult to detect. If necessary can be denied."
"Number 20: Arming of fishing vessels." Remarks:
For warning shots. Make little of it." And so on New, to Paragraph IV (F) 2 (b) of the Indictment, the allegation that "On 14th October 1933 they led Germany League of nations."
to take judicial notice. The Nazis took this opportunity application of sanctions by other countries.
Anticipating which I offer as Exhibit, USA 51.
It is a directive Paragraph 1: "The enclosed directive gives the "2. I request the chiefs of the Army and Navy High out the preparations in accordance with the following points:
"(a) Strictest secrecy. It is of the utmost importance that no facts become known to the outside world from which preparation for resistance against sanctions can be inferred or which is incompatible with Germany's existing obligations in the sphere of foreign policy regarding the demilitarized zone. If necessary, the preparations must take second place to this necessity." I think that makes the point without further reading. One of the immediate consequences of the action was that following the withdrawal from the League of Nations, Germany's armament program was still further increased. I introduced this morning document C-153, as Exhibit USA-43, so that is already in. From that, at this point, I wish to read paragraph 5. That, as you recall, was a document dated 12 May, 1934. Paragraph 5: "Owing to the speed of military political development since Germany quitted Geneva and based on the progress of the army, the new A-Plan will only be drawn up for a period of two years. The third A phase lasts accordingly from 1.4.34 to 31.3.36." Then, the next allegation of the Indictment, if the Tribunal please: "On 10 March, 1935, the defendant Goering announced that Germany was building a military air force." That is a historical fact of which I ask the Court to take jedicial notice, an I am quite certain that the defendant Goering would not dispute it. We have a copy of the German publication known as das Archiv--I suppose that is the way they pronounce it--the number of March 1935, and it es page 1830 to which I refer. I would offer that in evidence, identifying it as our number 2292-PS; I offer it as USA-52.
It is an announcement concerning the German Air Force:
"The Reich Minister for Aviation, General of the Airmen, Goering, in his talk with the special correspondent of the Daily Mail, Ward Price, expressed himself on the subject of the German Air Force.
"General Goering said?
"In the extension of our national defense, (Sicherheit) it was necessary, as we repeatedly told the world, to take care of defense in the air. As far as that is concerned, I restricted myself to those measures absolutely necessary. The guiding line of my actions was, not the creation of an aggressive force which would threaten other nations, but merely the completion of a military aviation which would be strong enough to repel, at any time, attacks on Germany." Das Archiv: "In conclusion, the correspondent asked whether the German Air Force will be capable of repelling attacks on Germany. General Goering replied to that exactly as follows:
"The German Air Force is just as passionately permeated with the will to defend the Fatherland to the last as it is convinced, on the other hand, that it will never be employed to threaten the peace of other nations." assurances of that kind from Nazi leaders, we take it that we are not foreclosed from showing that they had different intentions from those announced. of the law for compulsory military service, or universal military service. secret training of personnel, the next step necessary to the program for aggressive war was a large-scale increase in military strength.
This could no longer be done under disguise and camouflage, and would have to be known to the world. Accordingly, on 16 March, 1935, there was promulgated a law for universal military service, in violation of Article 173 of the Versailles Treaty. as it appears in the Reichsgesetzblatt, which is the official compilation of laws, in Title I of Volume I, yearly volume 1935, or Jahrgang, at page 369. I think I need not offer the book or the law in evidence. read that; it is right at the end of the article. I should refer to that as our Document Number 1654-PS, so as to identify it.
"In this spirit the German Reich Cabinet has today passed the following law:
"Law for the Organization of the Armed Forces of March 16, 1935.
"The Reich Cabinet has passed the following law which is herewith promulgated:
"Section 1.
"Service in the Armed Forces is based upon compulsory military duty.
"Section 2.
"In peace time, the German Army, including the police troops transferred to it, is organized into: 12 Corps and 36 Divisions." of that. It says "16 Divisions", but the original German says 36 Divisions.
"Section 3.
"The Reich Minister of War is charged with the duty of submitting immediately to the Reich Ministry detailed laws on compulsory military duty."
That is signed, "Berlin, March 16, 1935." It is signed first by the Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor Adolph Hitler, and then by many other officials, including the following defendants in this case: von Neurath; Frick; Schacht; Goering; Hess; Frank.
Does the Court contemplate a short recess?
THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn for ten minutes.
(Whereupon at 3:40 p.m. a short recess was taken.)
COLONEL STOREY: If the Tribunal please, the Prosecution expects, tomorrow, to offer in evidence some captured enemy moving pictures, and, in order to give defense counsel an opportunity to see them before they are offered in evidence--and in response to their request made to the Tribunal some time ago--the showing of these films for defense counsel will be held in the court room this evening at 8 o'clock.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, Colonel Storey.
MR. ALDERMAN: May it please the Tribunal, I have now reached Paragraph IV, F, 2(e) of the Indictment, which alleges: "On 21 May, 1935, they falsely announced to the world, with intent to deceive and allay fears of aggressive intentions, that they would respect the territorial limitations of the Versailles Treaty and Comply with the Locarno Pacts". states, the Nazis followed a policy of making false assurances, thereby tending to create confusion and a false sense of security. Thus, on the same date on which Germany renounced the armament provisions of the Versailles Treaty, Hitler announced the intent of the German Government to respect the territorial limitations of Versailles and Locarno. number 2288-PS, the pertinent volume of the issue of the Volkischer Beabachter containing Hitler's speech in the Reichstag on that date.
In that speech he said:
"Therefore, the Government of the German Reich shall absolutely respect all other articles pertaining to the cooperation (zasammenleben)--really meaning the living together in harmony-of the various nations including territorial agreements; revisions which will be unavoidable as time goes by it mil carry out by way of a friendly understanding only.
"The Government of the German Reich has the intention not to sign any treaty which it believes not to be able to fullfil. However, it will live up to every treaty signed voluntarily even if it Was composed before this Government took over. Therefore, it will in particular adhere to all the allegations under the Locarno Pact as long as the other partners of the pact also adhere to it." and Versailles Treaties, include the following:
The Rhine Pact of Locarno, 16 October 1925, Article 1:
"The high contracting parties, collectively and severally, guarantee, in the manner provided in the following Articles; the maintenance of the territorial status quo, resulting from the frontiers between Germany and Belgium and between Germany and France and the inviolability of the said frontiers, as fixed by, or in pursuance of the Treaty of Peace, signed as Versailles, on June 28, 1919, and also the observance of the stipulation of Articles 42 and 43 of the said Treaty, concerning the demilitarized zone." Rhineland.
Then from the Versailles Treaty, 28 June, 1919, Article 42:
"Germany is forbidden to maintain or construct any fortifications, either on the left bank of the Rhine or on the right bank, to the west of the line drawn 50 kilometers to the east of the Rhine.
"Article 43: In the area defined above, the maintenance and the assembly of armed forces, either permanently or temporarily and military maneuvers of any kind, as well as the upkeep of all permanent works for mobilization, are in the same way forbidden."
The next allegation of the indictment (f):
"On 7th March, 1936, they re-occupied and fortified the Rhineland, in violation of the Treaty of Versailles and the Rhine Pact of Locarno of 16 October, 1925, and falsely announced to the world that 'we have no territorial demands to make in Europe.'" with the Nazis ever since its establishment, after World War 1. Not only was this a blow to their increasing pride, but it was a bar to any effective strong position which Germany might want to take on any vital issues. In the event of any sanctions against Germany, in the form of military action, the French and other powers would get well into Germany east of the Rhine, before any German resistance could even be put up. Therefore, any German plans to threaten or breach international obligations or for any kind of aggression, required the preliminary reoccupation and refortification of this open Rhineland territory. Plans and preparations for the reoccupation of the Rhineland started very early. which we identify as C-139, and which appears to be signed by the handwriting of Blomberg. I offer it in evidence as U.S.A. Exhibit 53.
The document deals with what is called "Operation Schulung", meaning schooling, or training. It is dated 2 May 1935 and even refers to prior Staff discussions on the subject dealt with. It is addressed to the Chief of the army Command, who at that time, I believe, was Fritsch; the Chief of the Navy High Command, Raeder, and the Reich Minister for Air, Goering.
It does not use the name "Rhineland" and does not, in terms, refer to it.
It is our view that it was a military plan for the military reoccupation of the Rhineland, in violation of the Treaty of Versailles and the Rhine Pact of Locarno. "Secret Document."
"For the operation, suggested in the last Staff Talks of the Armed Forces, I lay down the Code name "Schulung" (training).
"The supreme direction of the operation 'Schulung' rests with the Reich Minister of Defense as this is a joint undertaking of the three services.
"Preparations for the operation will begin forthwith according to the following directives:
"1. General.
"1.) The operation must, on issue of the code word "Carry out Schulung", be executed by a surprise blow at lightning speed.
very smallest number of officers should be informed and employed in the drafting of reports, drawings, etc., and these officers only in person.
"2.) There is no time for mobilization of the Forces taking part. These will be employed in their peace-time strength and with their peace-time equipment.
"3.) The preparation for the operation will be made without regard to the present inadequate state of our armaments. Every improvement of the state of our armaments will make possible a greater measure of preparedness and thus result in better prospects of success." unnecessary to read it. inconsistent with any theory that it was merely a training order, or that it might have been defensive in nature. The operation was to be carried out as a surprise blow at lightning speed (Schlargartig als Verberfall).The air forces were to provide support for the attack.
There was to be reinforcement by the East Prussion division. Furthermore, this document is dated 2 Play 1935, which is about 6 weeks after the promulgation of the Conscription Law on 16 March, 1935, and so it could hardly have been planned as a defensive measure against any expected sanctions which might have been applied by reason of the passage of the Conscription Law. until 7 March, 1936, so that this early plan would necessarily have been totally revised to suit the existing conditions and specific objectives. As I say, although the plan does not mention the Rhineland, it has all of the indications of a Rhineland Operation Plan. That the details of this particular plan were not ultimately the ones that were carried out in reoccupying the Rhineland does not at all detract from the vital fact that as early as 2 May 1935, the Germans had already planned that operation, not merely as a Staff Plan but as a definite operation. It was evidently not on their timetable to carry out the operation so soon, if it could be avoided. But they were prepared to do so, if necessary, to revise French sanctions against their Conscription Law. date of the signing of the Franco-Russian Pact, which the Nazis later asserted as their excuse for the Rhineland reoccupation. was actually carried into execution on 7 March, 1936, were issued on 2 March, 1936 by the War Minister and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, Blomberg, and addressed to the Commander-in-Chief of the Army, Fritsch, the Commanderin-Chief of the Navy, Raeder, and Air Minister and C-in-C of the Air Force, Goering. We have that order signed by Blomberg, headed, as usual, "Top Secret", identified by us as C-159. I offer it in evidence as U.S.A. Exhibit 54.
The German copy of that document bears the defendant Raeder's initial in green pencil, with a red pencil note "To be submitted to the C-in-C of the Navy".
The first part of the Order reads:
"Supreme Command of the Navy:
"1. The Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor has made the following decision:
"By reason of the Franco-Russian alliance, the obligations accepted by Germany in the Locarno Treaty, as far as they apply to Articles 42 and 43, of the Treaty of Versailles which referred to the demilitarized zone, are to be regarded as obsolete.
"2. Sections of the Army and Air Force will therefore be transferred simultaneously in a surprise move to garrisons of the demilitarized zone. In this connection, I issue the following orders:--"
We also have the orders for Naval cooperation. The original German document, which we identify as C-194, was issued on 6 March, 1936, in the form of an order on behalf of the Reich Minister for War, Blomberg, signed by Keitel, and addressed to the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy, Raeder, setting out detailed instructions for the Commander-in-Chief of the Fleet and the Admirals commanding the Baltic and North Sea. I offer the document in evidence as Exhibit U.S.A. 55.
The short covering letter is as follows:
"To: C-in-C Navy:
"The Minister has decided the following after the meeting:
"1. The inconspicuous air reconnaissance in the German bay, not over the line Texel-Doggerbank, from midday on Z-Day onward, has been approved. C-in-C air force will instruct the air command VI from midday 7 March to hold in readiness single reconnaissance aircraft to be at the disposal of the C-in-C fleet.
"2. The Minister will reserve the decision to set up a U-Boat reconnaissance on line, until the evening of 7 March.
The immediate transfer of U-Boats from Kiel to Wilhelmshaven has been approved.
"3. The proposed advance measures for the most part exceed Degree of Emergency A and therefore are out of the question as the first countermeasures to be taken against military preparations of neighboring states. It is far more essential to examine the advance measures included in Degree of Emergency A, to see whether one or other of the especially conspicuous measures could not be omitted."
That is signed "Keitel". orders, and I think I need not read further. speech on 7 March 1936. I have the volume of the "Voelkische Beobachter", Berlin, Sunday, 8 March 1936, our document 2289-PS, which I offer in evidence as Exhibit U.S.A. 56. only read a short portion.
"Men of the German Reichstag! France has replied to the repeated friendly offers and peaceful assurances made by Germany by infringing the Reich pact through a military alliance with the Soviet Union exclusively directed against Germany. In this manner, however, the Locarno Rhine pact has lost its inner meaning and ceased in practice to exist. Consequently, Germany regards herself, for her part, as no longer bound by this dissolved treaty. The German government are now constrained to face the new situation created by this alliance, a situation which is rendered more acute by the fact that the Franco-Soviet treaty has been supplemented by a Treaty of Alliance between Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union exactly parallel in form. In accordance with the fundamental right of a nation to secure its frontiers and ensure its possibilities of defense, the German government have today restored the full and unrestricted sovereignty of Germany in the demilitarized zone of the Rhineland." of the Rhineland caused extensive international reprecussions. As a result of the protests lodged with the League of Nations, the Council of the League made an investigation and announced the following finding, of which I ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice, as being carried in the League of Nations monthly summary, March, 1936, Volume 16, Page 78, and it is also quoted in an article by Quincy Wright, in the American Journal of International Law, page 487, 1936.
The finding is this:
"That the German government has committed a breach of Article 43 of the Treaty of Versailles, by causing on March 7, 1936, military forces to enter and establish themselves in the demilitarized zone, referred to in Article 42 and the following articles of that Treaty, and in the Treaty of Locarno. At the same time, on March 7, 1936, the Germans reoccupied the Rhineland in flagrant violation of the Versailles and Locarno Treaties. They again tried to allay the fears of other European powers and lead them into a false sense of security by announcing to the world 'we have no territorial demands to make in Europe.'" That appears in this same speech of Hitler's, which I have offered in evidence as U.S.A. Exhibit 56, which is document 2289-PS.
The language will be found on page 6, column 1, "We have no territorial claims to make in Europe. We know above all that all the tensions resulting either from false territorial settlements or from the disproportion of the numbers of inhabitants to their living spaces cannot, in Europe, be solved by war." been discussing, I think do not need judicial proof because they are historical facts. We have been able to bring you a number of interesting documents, illuminating that history. The existence of prior plans and preparations is indisputable from the very nature of things. The method and sequence of these plans Germany.
In this process, they conspired and engaged in munitions of war, and they built up an air force.
They with League of Nations on the 14th October 1933.
They Instituted universal military service on 16 March, 1935.
On 21 May, territorial limitations of Versailles and Locarno.
On March requiring long and extensive preparations.
The process national obligations and treaties.
They stopped at nothing.
of the story of the aggression against Austria. I do not I am perfectly willing to do so.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you going to use this volume of documents marked "M" tomorrow?
MR ALDERMAN: There will be a new one marked "N".
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn until 10:00 08clock tomorrow morning.
(Whereupon, at 1630 hours the hearing of the Tribunal adjourned to reconvene at 28 November 1945, at 1000 hours.
Tribunal, in the matter of: The United States
THE PRESIDENT: I call upon Counsel for the United States.
Mr. SIDNEY ALDERMAN: May it please the Tribunal, at this point we distribute document book lettered "N", which will cover the next phase of the case as it will be presented. Of the five large phases of aggressive warfare, which I undertake to present to the Tribunal, I have now completed the presentation of the documents on the first phase, the phase lasting from 1933 to 1936, consisting of the preparation for aggression. conspirators for aggression lasted from, approximately, 1936 to March 1939, when they had completed the absorption of Austria and the occupation of all of Czechoslovakia. I again invite the Court's attention to the chart on the wall, at which you may be interested in glancing from time to time as the presentation progresses. present subject are set forth in Sub-section 3, under Section IV (f), appearing at Pages 7 and 8 of the printed English text. This portion of the indictment is divided into throe parts: First, the 1936 to 1938 phase of the plan, planning for the assault on Austria and Czechoslovakia; second, the execution of the plan to invade Austria, November 1937 to March 1938; third, the execution of the plan to invade Czechoslovakia, April 1938 to March 1939.
of the indictment headed "(a) Planning for the assault on Austria and Czechoslovakia" is proved for the most part by Document No. 386-PS, which I introduced on Monday as Exhibit U.S.A. 25. That was one of the handful of documents with which I began my presentation of this part of the case. The minutes taken by Colonel Hoszbach of the meeting in the Reich Chancellory on 5 November 1937, when Hitler developed his political last will and testament, reviewed the desire of the Nazi Germany for more room in central Europe and made preparations for the conquest of Austria and Czechoslovakia as a means of strengthening Germany for the general pattern of the Nazi conspirators for aggression. Austrian phase of aggression, in two separate parts. I shall first present the materials and documents relating to the aggression against Austria. They have been gathered together in the document book, which has just been distributed. Later I shall present the materials relating to the aggression against Czechoslovakia. They will be gathered in a separate document book. First, the events leading up to the autumn of 1937, and the strategic position of the National Socialists in Austria. I suggest at this point, if the Tribunal please, that in this phase we see the first full flowering of what has come to be known as "fifth column" infiltration techniques in other countries; and first under that, the National Socialist aim of absorption of Austria. conspirators proceeded, after the meeting of 5 November 1937, covered by the Hoszbach minutes, it is advisable to review the steps, which had already been taken in Austria by the Nazi Socialists of both Germany and Austria.
The position, which the Nazis had reached by the Fall of 1937 made it possible for them to complete their absorption of Austria much sooner and with much less cost than had been contemplated at the time of the meeting, covered by the Hoszbach minutes. aim of the German National Socialists. On the first page of "Mein Kampf", Hitler said, "German Austria must return to the Great German Motherland," and he continued by stating that this purpose of having common blood in a common Reich could not be satisfied by a mere economic union. Moreover, this aim of absorption of Austria was an aim from 1933 on and was regarded as a serious program, which the Nazis were determined to carry out. document No. 1760-PS, which, if admitted, would be Exhibit U.S.A. 57. This document is an affidavit executed in Mexico City on 28 August of this year by George S. Messerschmidt, United States Ambassador, now in Mexico City. Before I quote from, or a part of Mr. Messerschmidt's affidavit, I should like to point out briefly that Mr. Messerschmidt was Consul General of the United States of America in Berlin from 1930 to the late Spring of 1934. He was than made American Minister in Vienna where he stayed until 1937.
him into frequent contact with German Government officials, and he reports in this affidavit that the Nazi Government officials, with whom he had contact, were on most occasions amazingly frank in their conversation and made no concealment of their aims. presents a somewhat novel problem of treatment in the presentation of this case. In lieu of reading this entire affidavit into the record, I should like, if it might be done in that way, to offer it in evidence, not merely the English original of the affidavit, but also a translation into German, which has been mimeographed.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Alderman, some of the Tribunal's documents are not marked with the "PS" number, which makes it very difficult to find. I wonder whether you have a copy of the book, which is numbered.
MR. ALDERMAN: If we could borrow the set that isn't numbered, we will number it. buted to Counsel for the Defendants.
DR. KUBUSCHOK (Defense Counsel): I am the attorney for the Defendant von Papen. An affidavit has just been turned over to the Court, an affidavit of a witness, who is obtainable. The content of the affidavit contains so many subjective opinions of the witness, it seems possible to hear the witness personally in this matter. matter of principle, whether, that which a witness can present by his presence, may instead be presented in the form of an affidavit; in other words, a witness who can be reached, should be brought in instead of an affidavit.
MR. ALDERMAN: May I be heard?
THE PRESIDENT: You have finished what you wanted to say?
DR. KUBUSCHOK: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, We will hear Mr. Alderman.