I want you to look at Paragraph 4 of the first section of the document. It states "The Fuehrer said with regard to Yugoslavia" -- Have you found the place?
A. Can you tell me what page that is, please.
Q. Page 1, the fourth paragraph.
"On the subject of Jugoslavia the Fuehrer has given the following directives"
A. I must have the wrong document.
Q. 1195-PS.
A. Yes, now I find the place.
Q. I have it here. In other words again, "On the subject of Jugoslavia the Fuehrer has given the following directives:" Do you see it? Is that correct?
A. (There was no answer).
Q. "The territory of Jugoslavia must go partially to Italy and will be done in accordance with the directives to the Minister of Foreign Affairs."
Have you found the place?
A. No, I can' find that here.
Q. The first words are, "In accordance with the direct information from the Foreign Office."
A. I am sorry; I can't find that. Which paragraph are you referring to?
Q. Paragraph 4, page 1, beginning with the words:
A. Yes. This document starts, "The Fuehrer has laid down the following principles for" -- Is that the place you are citing?
Q. The paragraph ends, "In accordance with the directives from the Foreign Office." Have you got it? Then there is further reference to the OKH.
A. There must be a mistake. I cannot find anything to that effect.
THE PRESIDENT: General Rudenko, it is a quarter to one, so perhaps we had better adjourn.
(A recess was taken until 1400 hours).
JOACHIM VON RIBBENTROP (Resumed) (CROSS EXAMINATION) Continued BY GENERAL RUDENKO:
Q. Defendant Ribbentrop, did you take cognizance of the document?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. Did you take cognizance of the full contents of the document or just Paragraph Four?
A. I read Paragraph One, theone you talked about earlier.
Q. Did you find the place where it says about the power of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs regarding the divion of the territory of Jugoslavia?
A. It says here in my document that the surrender of the territory occupied by the Italians has been prepared by the letter of the Fuehrer and then carried out by order of the Foreign Office.
Q. That is correct. That is what I have in view, exactly this place. In section two of this document, which is headed "The Delimination of the Frontiers", it is stated there -- Section Two, Page Two of the document, it is stated that as far as the delimitation of the frontiers was not exactly stated, this was done in accordance with the directives received fromthe Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
A. Yes, I see that.
Q. I should like to put one question in that connection. Does this document express the will of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the division of Jugoslav territory? Is that correct?
A. It appears from that that probably the Foreign Office would merely ascertain others, apart from those which had been fixed.
Q. It is clear. Regarding Jugoslavia, I should like to put another two questions to you. On 4 June--This does not refer to this document any more.
On 4 June 1941 in theGerman Embassy, under the presidency of the German Ambassador, there was a meeting at which it was decided regarding the forced evacuation of the Slovenes and Serbs. At this meeting it was decided in accordance with a telegram from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 389, of 31 May 1941. Do you know about these measures?
A. No, I must say that I do not know them. Perhaps I may read through them.
Q. Yes, please.
A. No. I do recollect that resettlement took place, but I am not informed about any details.
Q. Yes, it is evidently difficult to remember all the details but you remember that the deportations took place in accordance with the directives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs?
A. Yes. Well, it says here that the Fuehrer has approved a resettlement scheme, but I do not know the details. Anyway, we certainly did play a part here, since the meeting took place with the representatives of the Foreign Office, but I can not say anything in detail now since I am not informed.
Q. Yes, I understand very well. There is another question in this connection. This was forced migration of the population?
A. I do not know.
Q. You do not knew about that? All right. Here is the last question in connection with Jugoslavia. After the attack of Germany on Jugoslavia, about 200 Jugoslav diplomatic employees who tried to get into Switzerland were taken under arrest and then, in spite of their protests, which were sent to yourMinistry, were forcibly taken to Belgrade, wherefrom many of them were directed to concentration camps and died there. Why did you not take the measures which you had to take after this transgression of the diplomatic immunity?
A. At this moment I can not recollect it at all, but as far as I know, it has always been my principal instructions on how diplomates should be treated that they were to be returned to their own countries. If it did not happen in this case, then I do not know why. But you yourself say that they were returned to Belgrade. That, at any rate, is in accordance with my instructions.
Whether they were interned atBelgrade and why, that I am afraid I do not know.
I do not think we had anything to do with that. you do not knew anything about that?
Q Very well. Here is another group of questions. Who besides Hitler signed the directive regarding the Sudetenland of 21 November 1938? Do you remember it?
A I do not know what the order is that you are referring to. May I look through it?
I see that I have also signed it. This is the law regarding the re-union of the Sudetenland with the Reich.
Q Do you remember that you really signed this law?
A. No doubt. If it says so here, then it must certainly have been like that, but, of course, at the moment I do not recollect.
Q. It is quite understandable. It is clear. Who besides Hitler signed the decree regarding the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia of 16 March 1939, which in essence liquidated any state sovereignty of the Czechoslovak Republic?
A I believe that I signed that one, too. Yes, I did. It says so here.
THE PRESIDENT: General Rudenko, surely all of these documents speak for themselves. The defendant has not challenged his signature upon these documents.
GENERAL RUDENKO: I understand very well, Mr. President. I only wanted to remind the defendant. He seems not to remember a few of the things, so I just wanted to present these documents to him. occupation of the Polish territories. Do you remember it?
Apr-2-A-RT-14-1a A 12.
10.39? No, I do not remember it. them in detail.
THE PRESIDENT: General Rudenko, if he does not dispute his signature, why should you waste time in putting these documents to him? His signature is on the document. He does not dispute it. This is a mere waste of time.
GENERAL RUDENKO: Yes. Then I have in connection with this only one more question. annexation of the Belgium territories, Malmedy and others.
I put these questions in order to come to a next question. Is it correct to state here that every time when a decree by the Hitler Government tried to give some basis for their directives, under such decrees there was always the signature of the Reich Minister Ribbentrop?
A I believe not. If any territorial changes were carried out, then the Fuehrer ordered them, and, as appears from these documents, all ministers concerned would then carry out countersign these orders which had originated with the Fuehrer, and, of course, I also countersigned those orders myself. already been submitted in evidence to the Tribunal as USSR 120. This is the document in which you organized the work, together with Himmler. I should like you to read to point six of this document.
A I beg your pardon. This is a different document. This has something to do with information. You were talking about forced work, labor. This seems to have something to do with communication.
Q That was incorrectly translated to you. I did not speak about slave labor. I only said that there was work involved. Please pay attention to Point Six of this document. I do not want to take up the time unnecessarily. I am quoting, It is stated here:
" The Ministry of Foreign Affairs gives every possible assistance to the Secret Intennigence Service. The Minister of Foreign Affairs, as far as Apr-2-A-RT-14-2a possible, in the foreign affairs, will provide certain employees for the Intelligence Service, and they will be put amongst the foreign representatives of Germany."
I want to skip one long paragraph and will read just the final paragraph: the head of the ministry of foreign affairs regarding all the questions of the activity of the secret intelligence service in every country.
Did you sign such agreement? Isn't that true?
A. Yes.
Q. Thus, we should like to state here that the foreign apparatus of the ministry of foreign affairs really carried on intelligence activities, or, in other words, spying.
A. No, you can't really say that, for the following reasons: differences between Himmler and myself about the intelligence service abroad. Thanks to the efforts of the Defendant Kaltenbrunner, that agreement was eventually signed. A cooperation had been planned, and I do by no means deny that the function existed -- that men of the intelligence service were to be used for our purposes in the foreign office. But in practice this was never carried through. The agreement couldn't become effective because it was concluded so late that the end of the war arrived first. I think the date, which is lacking in this copy, must have been 1944 or 1945, when that agreement was concluded. Thus, an actual cooperation didn't take place; but it was intended that such cooperation was to be brought about, and I was particularly interested in that. There had been Certain differences and I desired to stop them and put it on a uniform basis.
That was the reason; and apart from that I think that is a part of the activity carried on by all countries abroad. I don't think it is anything unusual.
Q. I am not asking you what you think of this; I only asked you whether it is correct that you did sign such an agreement, and you replied to this question in the affirmative?
A. Yes.
Q. I have no further question in regard to this document.
Here is another document which is from this series. Do you remember
A. That do you say -- one million? I didn't quite understands.
Q. I should like to take cognizance of this document; it is a short document.
A. May I just look through it please?
Q. Of course.
A. Yes. I recollect the matter, and I think certain funds were placed at their disposal in that connection.
Q. Yes. It was given to Kaltenbrunner; isn's that correct?
A. I can't tell you in detail, but I think I did give instructions at the time to the foreign office that financial support should be given in that matter; that's right.
Q. This is exactly the question in which I was interested. The document speaks for itself. Now I shall refer to another group of questions. you met the Defendant Keitel to discuss a memorandum regarding the possibility of an attack by Germany on the soviet Union. Consequently, nearly one year before that attack on the soviet Union you knew exactly the plans for this attack.
A. No, that isn't a correct version. The Defendant Keitel was with me at the time at Fuschl, and on that occasion he mentioned to me that the Fuehrer had certain qualms regarding Russia and that he considered a conflagration not altogether impossible. He on his part had prepared a memorandum and he intended to consult with the Fuehrer. He had objections against any conflict of that type in the east, and he asked me at the time to influence the Fuehrer in that direction, which I agreed to do. But any intention of an attack was not at all discussed. It was merely a general staff discussion. No concrete matters were communicated to me by him.
Q. Very well. I didn't want to keep the attention of the Tribunal on this question. I should like to propose another question in this connection. also your opinion regarding the war with the USSR to Hitler. Did you have a conversation with Hitler on that theme?
A. I have discussed that subject several times with Hitler, and on that occasion I had discussed the danger of preventative wars with him and he in turn informed me of his objections, which I have mentioned here.
Q. Yes; all right. It is quite correct. Tell me, did you know that the so-called "Green Map" of the Defendant Goering which contained directives regarding the purge and exploitation of the temporarily occupied territories of the Soviet Union was prepared a long time before the actual attack took place?
A. No, I didn't know it. The name "Green Folder" I heard for the first time here.
Q. Very well, That regards not only Keitel, but the contents of the document.
A. Neither the file nor the name.
Q. You didn't know. All right. You knew that already before the war directives were prepared regarding the extermination of the peaceful Soviet population?
A. No, that wasn't known to me either.
Q. Very well. When did you know about that?
A. Of such plans I heard nothing at all.
Q. And the directives?
A. All of the preparations.
Q. And regarding the directives and the Plan Barbarossa, you knew about that already before?
A. Regarding what? I didn't quite hear you.
Q. Regarding the jurisdiction in the region of Barbarossa -- that is, the Plan Barbarossa?
A. No, I have to say that I have never occupied myself personally with that, but it could be that some department in my foreign office did cooperate. I myself never concerned myself with the question of jurisdiction; I was excluded from the beginning of the conflict with the Soviet Union.
Q. I should like you to take cognizance of a telegram which you directed on the 10th of July, 1941, at 1410, to the German Ambassador in Tokio.
I am submitting this document under the number USSR 406. You must remember this telegram.
A. To whom is it addressed? It doesn't say here.
Q. To the German Ambassador in Tokio.
A. Oh, yes, I see; Tokio.
Q. Apparently you remember it. I should like you to pay attention to the words which are found on page 4 at the end of this document. They are underlined, I am told, to make it clear. I shall read it into the record.
A. which part are you referring to? Is it the last part?
Q. It is on the last page, the fourth page of the document. It is underlined.
A. Yes, I have found it.
Q. I am going to quote it:
"I request you by all means in your possession to have your influence on Matsuoka so that Japan will declare war on Russia as soon as possible; the sooner it will happen the better it will be. The final aim should remain always in the future, the fact that Japan and we, before the coming of winter, will have our hands together on the Siberian frontier. The crash will be so great that the question of the crash of England or complete annihilation of the British Isles will be only a question of time." Do you find this place?
A. Yes, I have got it.
Q. Is this one of your efforts regarding the localization of war?
A. I didn't understand that last question?
Q. I am saying, is this one of your efforts regarding localization of war?
A. The war against Russia had started, and I tried -- and the Fuehrer was of the same view -- to get Japan into the war with us so that the war against Russia would finish as soon as possible. That was the sense of that telegram.
Q. This was not only the position of the Fuehrer, but it was also your policy as minister of foreign affairs at the time?
A. Yes; yes.
Q. I have a few more questions. You state that never did you hear anything regarding the cruelties which took place in concentration camps?
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. During the war you, as minister of foreign affairs, took cognizance of and read foreign newspapers. Did you know that the foreign press contained various information on that matter?
A. No, that only applies up to a point. I had to read so much and to work so much every day that I only read such foreign political news in the foreign press as had been handed to me. Thus, during the whole war I never read news coming from abroad which referred to concentration camps, until one day the Soviet Russian armies captured the camp at Maidanek in Poland. On that occasion news came from our embassy and I had press news put before me. All that has been discussed here. I took those newspapers to the Fuehrer. Before that I knew nothing at all about atrocities or any measures in concentration camps.
Q. Did you know about the notes of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Soviet Union regarding the cruelties and inhumanities committed by the German fascists in the temporarily occupied territories of the Soviet Union upon the population of the Soviet Union, and regarding pillages and so forth?
A. That note reached me, I think, through diplomatic channels, but I can't remember it just now. It may be that it came through news agencies. However, I do remember that there were several notes at the time, and I remember one of them, which I had submitted to the Fuehrer. But since the beginning of the German-Russian war we could not carry out any actions in those territories, and we exercised no influence. Therefore, I am not in any way informed about the details.
Q. I was primarily interested in the basic fact that you were aware of the notes of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Soviet Union. Tell me, please, do you knows that millions of citizens were deported into slavery to Germany?
A. No, I don't know.
Q. Is it possible that you don't know it? And these citizens who were it. Germany and were used as slaves - you are not aware of that either?
A. No, According to what I heard, all these foreign workers are supposed to have been treated well in Germany. That other things happened too, that I consider possible, but, on the whole, I think a lot was done to treat these workers well. I know that on certain occasions departments of the Foreign Office worked in this direction so as to stop any unpleasant things, but on the whole we had no influence in that sphere, since we had been excluded from Eastern questions.
Q. Why were you sufficiently informed that foreign laborers were treated well, and were not informed regarding the fact that they were treated as slaves? Why is that?
A. I don't think that this applies. We in the Foreign Office did help French and Soviet workers by getting artists from France, for instance. We advised on questions of their welfare, and I know that the German Workers Front did everything, so that as to the sector which we could look into, the workers were treated very well and their leisure time was locked after fairly well.
At least, that was where we cooperated.
Q. Very well. Here is a penultimate group of questions in connection with the activity of the Ribbentrop Battalion. I now ask you to read, the testimony of 88 Oberstrumbannfuehrer Norman Paul Foerster. This document is submitted under number USSR-445. Please pay attention to page 3 of this testimony of Foerster; it in underlined there. It is stated there:
"In August of 1941 I arrived at the designated address in the term of Berlin and learned that I was ordered to Sonderkommando SS of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In this command there were about 80 to 100, and later there were 300 or 400 personnel. Later the name of Sonderkommando was changed to Battalion, a special battalion of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
"I was received by the Baron von Kuensberg in the building of the Ministry of Foreign Affaire, whore the Sonderkommander were quartered. He explained to me that the Sonderkommando was created in accordance with directives of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, von Ribbentrop. 'According to the directives of von Ribbentrop' said Kuensberg, 'our Sonderkommander must go to the occupied territories, together with the forward sections of the army, In order to preserve the cultural centers - such as museums, scientific institutions, galleries of paintings, and so forth - from annihilation or possible destruction by the German soldiers, in order that all these treasures should be taken out to Germany later."
Here I skip a few lines, and then: Lieben, Kralling. Ratterson, and others, von Kuensberg stated orally an order of Ribbentrop regarding, two towns in Russia, specifically old scientific institutions, libraries, and palaces, to look at the archives and to take out everything that has any definite value."
Did you find that in the document?
A. Yes.
Q. I should like you to reply to the following question of mine. You know that such a battalion existed in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and that in accordance with your directives, it was especially occupied -- as is stated in this document -- in the preservation of cultural treasures.
I should like you to reply to this question.
A. It is quite incorrect, the way it is put in this document. I can't recognize it, and I have to object to it. what is correct is the following: appointed long before the campaign so as to collect important documents in France which could have been of interest to us, and confiscate them. that no unnecessary destruction of objects of art should take place. Any order to have these things transported to Germany, or to rob, he certainly did not have from me under any circumstances. I don't know just how this statement can about, but under no circumstances is it correct.
Q. Well, you are against many of the documents which have been submitted here. This doesn't mean that the document isn't correct, but I am not going to quote this document further. ing to the defendant Rosenberg. It has already been submitted to the Tri bunal under number PS-85. I shall quote here paragraph 2 of the document. It has already been submitted, so I will just read it into the record. This letter was addressed, by Goering, to Rosenberg. He said there:
"After lengthy search, I very much welcomed it when finally a place was selected for the collection. I must state also, however, that other instances were referred to in directives of the Fuehrer. For instance, first of all, there is reference to the Reich Minister of Foreign Affairs, who directed, several months ago, a circular to all the organizations where, amongst other things, he stated that full powers were given to him for the preservation of art treasures and cultural treasures in the occupied territories." ing this. Do you recall this letter exactly?
A. I don't know how this letter from Reichsmarshal Goering came about, but if any authorities are mentioned in it, then this could only concern the fact that these art treasures were secured in these territories.
We in the Foreign Office, as I have stated here, did not appropriate any art treasures for our department or my person. It is possible that these art treasures were secured temporarily, but none of them became our Apr-2-A-RT-16-1a property.
Therefore, it can only be misunderstanding in this letter because as I remember exactly, this concerned the securing of these art treasures. In France, for instance, the situation had arisen where flats and museums were robbed, and I even renumber that I asked the armed forces to furnish guards so that those art treasures could be watched. At any rate, we in the foreign Office, for ourselves, never saw any of them. I should like here to put another question in this connection. Do you took that under the term "the preservation of art treasures" was meant, in reality the pillaging of art treasures of the occupied territories? to anybody, I should like to state that empatically. many men on his staff, I gave him an order immediately that his whole staff-which wasn't a battalion, as was said here-should be dissolved immediatly. and I even think I sacked him from the Foreign Office, I remember, because he didn't do what I told him to. I think he was suspended from duty. of February 1938 on. Your arrival to this post came in the period in the beginning, when Hitler undertook a series of acts of Foreign policy which finally led to the world war. There arises the question of why Hitler appointee. you as Minister of Foreign Affairs just before the realization of a wide program of aggression. Don't you think that he thought you were the most suitable man for this post, with whom he could have no differences on any of the important questions?
A I can't tell you anything about Adolp Hitler's thoughts He didn't tell me about them. He knew that I was a faithfull servant of his, and he know that I had the view that a strong Germany was necessary. He also know that I wanted to carry through, through diplomatic and peaceful channels. What other intentions the Fuehrer may have had, or what ideas he may have had, that I don't know.
Q Here is the last question. How can you explain the fact that even now, when before you in all its forms has developed the picture of the bloody crimes of the Hitler regime, when you took full cognizance of it and understood the Apr-2-A-RT-16-2a Hitlerite policy which led you to the defendant's bench-- how is it possible to explain that you still think that this regime was right, and you furthermore state that the leading criminal clique was, in reality, only a group of idealists?
How can you explain that to us?
THE PRESIDENT: That seems to be a number of questions in one, and I don't think it is a proper question to put to the witness.
GENERAL RUDENKO: I thought that this was only one question. BY GENERAL RUDENKO:
Q Will you answer please, defendant von Ribbentrop?
THE PRESIDENT: I told you, General Rudenko, that the Tribunal does not think it a proper question to put.
GENERAL RUDENKO: I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr Horn, do you want to re-examine?
Dr. HORN: I have to further questions to put to the witness, Mr.President.
THE PRESIDENT: Then the defendant can return to his seat in the dock.
THE PRESIDENT: Now, Dr. Horn, I understand that you are going to deal with your documents, are you not?
DR. HORN: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: I see the time; we might perhaps adjourn for ten minutes now (A recess was taken). MR BARRINGTON:
I will pass on to the second group, which are numbers 48 to 62 inclusive, and those are all on the subject of allied rearmament and alleged warlike intentions before the outbreak of war.
No. 54 appears to be missing from my book, and I don't know whether it was intentionally left out. irrelevant. They are in Book 3, my Lord.
THE PRESIDENT: Fifty-nine is different, isn't it? Fifty-nine is dealing with the speech by Sir Malcolm MacDonald about the colonies.
MR. BARRINGTON: Yes. That is not exactly rearmament, but of course it is on the same theme in a way, that it is a provocation to war. It is certainly in rather a different category from the others.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
MR. BARRINGTON: The third group deals with Poland, and that is avery large group because it includes all the negotiations before theoutbreak of the war, and the numbers involved in that group are 74 to 214. two phases, The first one would be the questions of the minorities and Lanzig and the Corridor, and the incidents connected with them, and the second phase-slightly overlapping in time, but roughly it follows after the other one- would be the diplomatic events involving other countries than Poland, that is to say, very approximately from the 15th of March 1939 onwards. The first phase of that group would be numbers 74 to 181, and the second phase 182 to 214.
Now, in regard to the first phase, there are two points. The Prosecution says that these are, with very few exceptions, irrelevant because they treat of incidents, and the problems arising out of these minority questions, and the Prosecution says those are irrelevant for two reasons. One of the documents among them consists of an exchange of notes between the German and Polish governments on the 29th of April 1939. That is TC-72, No. 14, in Book 5. That exchange of notes consists of a confirmation that both parties unconditionally renounce the use of force on the basis of the Kellogg Pact. That had been done previously on the 26th of January 1934, as appears in another document here. It is on page 2 of my note, TC-21.
THE PRESIDENT: What was the date ox TC-72.
MR. BARRINGTON: TC-72 No. 14 was the 28th of April 1939.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
MR. BARRINGTON: And on the footing that the two countries unconditionally renounced the use of force on the basis of the Kellogg Pact, added to the fact that the defendant Ribbentrop has himself said that during 1938 Germany was on very good terms with Poland, and that also there was a declaration made by Germany and Poland on the 5th of November 1937 about minorities-that is No. 123 in this list of document; it occurs at the top of page 4 in the notes-in view of those things, the Prosecution says that accounts and reports of these incidents and minority problems are irrelevant and very old history,
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle) (Interposing): You have them all cumulative starting with 76. Well, I am afraid I must say, Your Honor, this was originally got out purely as a working note, and that is rather an error. It should be irrelevant on account, of TC-21.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
MR. BARRINGTON: My Lord, I was going to say that perhaps I might anticipate an objection that Dr. Horn has been good enough to tell me that he will make to this, that yesterday he contended that certain incidents before Munich had been condoned by the Munich Agreement, and that the argument I have just put up is on the same lines as that which the Tribunal turned down yesterday. was negotiated in ignorance of the Fall Gruen, and that from the point of view of condoning previous incidents, it is not in the same footing as an agreement negotiated in full knowledge of the circumstances. Prosecution would suggest, looking at the middle column on page 2, allowing No. 75, which is the Polish Treaty of 1919, and TC-21, which I have already mentioned, which reaffirmed the Kellogg Pact, and No. 123, and TC-72, No. 14 16 which I have already mentioned. The remainder, perhaps, might all be said to be irrelevant, but it would be reasonable, perhaps, to allow Nos.