"It is the task of leaders at all levels to keep constantly alive the meaning of the present struggle. Support for the Bolshevist fight behind the front by way of thoughtlessness must be prevented.
"It is to be expected that non-Bolshevist Ukrainians, Russians and Tartars will be converted to the New Order. The non-participation of numerc alleged anti-Soviet elements must give place to a definite decision in favor of active cooperation against Bolshevism. Where it does not exist it must be forced by suitable measures.
"Voluntary cooperation in the reconstruction of occupied territory is an absolute necessity for the achievement of our economic and political aims.
"It has as its condition a just treatment of all non-Bolshevist sections of the population some of whom have for years fought heroically against Bolshevism.
"The ruling of this country demands from us results, strictness with ourselves and submergence of the individual. The bearing of every soldier is constantly under observation. It can make enemy propaganda ineffective or give it a springboard. If the soldier in the country takes from he peasant, the last cow, the breed sow, the last chicken or the seed, then no restoration of the economy can be achieved.
"In all measures it is not the momentary success which is decisive. All measures must, therefore, be judged by their effectiveness over a pert of time.
"Respect for religious customs, particularly those of Mehammedan Tarta must be demanded.
"In pursuance of these concepts there are other measures besides to be carried out by the later Administration. The enlightenment the population by propaganda, encouragement of personal initiative, e.g., by prizes, extensive detailing of the population towards fighting the partisans and expansion of the local auxiliary police must be given more significance.
"For the achievement of this object the following must be demanded.
"severest action to be taken :
Against every transgression of the honor of a soldier." and independent " battalions. to you together with the Reichenau order ? The resemblance between the two to say the least, striking and the date is about the same.
A. I shall Brave to tell you that this order escapes my memory absolutel According to what is contained in the last part particularly, I must assume that the order is genuine and has been issued by me. whether it was given the strength of the Reichenau order or not I cannot tell you, to the best my ability, but I do want to point out to you, that if it says here that the system must be exterminated, then that is extermination of the Bolshevi system but not the extermination of human beings. of collaboration with the SD, a collaboration which, because of the lack of knowledge we had of the doings of the SD, was out of the question in any case. soldiers -- namely, that they must not take the fast cow away from the farmers, that they must respect religious customs, that they must respect the other sex and that, on the other hand, they naturally must not be careless of the danger of partisans, something which the German soldier was always inclined to be any wildness on the part of the German soldier, any lack of discipline, and most of all any violation of the honor of a soldier.
Commissioner, were you not? You were asked, and I read on page -- I will have to find the page, Your Honor. I have a typed copy here, Your Honor, without the final page reference.
Were you questioned before the Commissioners as follows:
"You know the order of General Reichenau in which he stated that there should be no consideration shown to the civilian population? Did you see the order and did he have any influence on your attitude and that of your troops to the civilian population?"
And you answered:
"We were informed of this order upon the suggestion of the Fuehrer, but none of the other leaders were of the same opinion as Reichenau, and it was never carried cut, especially in my area."
You had not forgotten the Reichenau order, had you? had been completely forgotten by me, and particularly this order of mine had been completely forgotten by me. After all, that is not surprising because that is a number of years age, and during these years I have signed hundreds, i not thousands, of orders, and I cannot possibly remember every detail.
Q Did you sign a lot of orders like this one? Is that why you have such difficulty remembering it? I have signed a lot of other orders, particularly a large number of reports and letters to be read by me, and I admit that I have forgotten that order. That is not surprising. I only know that this order, at any rate, as opposed to the Reichenau order, very strongly emphasizes the demand which. I make for decent behavior on the part of my soldiers. That, after all, is the important point. suggested that you pass it down, and the only thing you have forgotten is that you did? when I came here when it appeared amongst the documents and before the Commission when it was shown to me.
I cannot, to the best of my ability, recollect that I gave that order. If I had done it, I would most certainly have mentioned it because in the second part the error supports my conceptions.
Q You think that you wrote the second part and not the first?
A I did not write the order at all myself. Very probably the order was shown to me in draft and then I signed it. In the first part the fight against the system and the extermination against the system is mentioned, as is the fight against the Jews as the bearers of the Partisan movement. That, after all, had its proper justification, but all that has nothing to do with the fact that Jews were to be exterminated. They were to be excluded, and the system was to be removed. That is the point that matters.
you did not even know that Jews were likely to be opposed to the new administration. It looks as if you very definitely wrote that to the attention of your soldiers; didn't you?
A. No, that I did not know that there were orders that Jews were to be exterminated. That order could not possibly recall it to me because it does not mention a word that the Jews were to be exterminated. It merely says that the system is to be exterminated. That is something quite different.
Q. I call your attention to the paragraph: "The soldier must appreciate the necessity for harsh punishment of Jewry, the spiritual bearer of the Bolshevist terror. This is also necessary in order to nip in the bud all uprisings which are mostly attributable to Jews." Jews without the soldiers knowing something about it, could they. Is that true?
A. That is perfectly possible, because as Ohlendorf has described it, the shootings of the Jews and the resettlement of them were camouflaged. The Jews were taken to desolate places and were shot and buried there, so that the commanding authorities had no knowledge of that. Naturally, it is possible that one or the other soldier, quite by accident, may have seen such an execution, and there is, in fact, evidence; I remember, for instance, the Russian indictment and an engineer in the Ukraine who was present during such a shooting and who describes it in the most horrible terms. The answer is that the fear of the SS was such that this man, instead of reporting this dirty business, kept it under his hat and is now coming out with it. Had he at that time gone to some military commanding authority and had be reported these events, then I am convinced that the commander in question would have intervened, and then, of course, we would also have heard of it, but the fact is that we did not hear about it.
GENERAL TAYLOR: One more question on this subject, Your Honor.
BY GENERAL TAYLOR:
Q. Witness, isn't it true that this order is very carefully drawn so that the troops would understand and, shall we say, sympathize with what the Einsatzkommandos were doing in the way of mass extermination of Jews?
A. You mean my order?
Q. Yes.
A. No. There is no question of that. There could be no question of my at any time, even between the lines, instigating their cooperation in such methods. How could I have referred to the soldier's honor and emphasized that in the end afterwards?
GENERAL TAYLOR: My Lord, the Prosecution has no further questions of this witness.
THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn now.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 1000 hours, 12 August 1946.)
DR. SAUTER: Dr. Sauter, for the defendant Funk.
Mr. President, I beg to be granted permission to submit to the Tribunal an added application on behalf of Defendant Funk and read it into the record.
"On Monday, the 5th of August, 1946, that is to say a week ago today, the prosecution submitted an affidavit of the former SS Obergruppenfuehrer Oswald Pohl, its number being 4045-PS, alleging certain connections between the Defendant Funk with the SS, particularly with reference to the so-called "gold deposits " of the SS in the Reichsbank. I was unable to object to the use of this affidavit during the session of last Monday, the 5th of August because, because of illness. I was absent on that day and had reported my absence in the appropriate manner to the Secretary General. Representing me, Dr. Nelte, in a submission to the Tribunal, asked for permission, still on the same day, to interrogate witness Oswald Pohl in person in order to obtain an affidavit from him. In an application dated the 7th of august, 1946, I myself repeated that application, asking at the same time for permission to call the witness Oswald Pohl for cross examination, and also that defendant Funk himself could make statements with reference to this renewed accusations. After submission of those applications of mine, the SS judge Dr. Reineeke and Dr. Morgan, have been heard as witnesses for the SS here in Court. Both of these witnesses have raised accusations against Oswald Pohl, although he was their SS comrade, in the most serious possible manner. The testimony of these two witnesses. Dr. Reineeke and Dr. Morgan, had furnished the proof that the former Obengruppenfuehrer Oswald Pohl, that is to say, a witness of the prosecution, firstly-
THE PRESIDENT: Are you applying to cross examine Pohl or what?
DR. SAUTER: No. I shall give you the reason, Mr. President, immediately, if will permit me to do so, why I do not with to do so. I have just said that the examination of witnesses Dr. Reineeke and Dr. Morgan had furnished proof that this witness of the prosecution is, firstly, a million fold murder, and secondly, that Pohl was the head of that clique of criminals which were carrying out the atrocities in concentration camps; certainly, that Pohl, with every means at his disposal, prevented the discovery of these atrocities and that he, for this purpose, even was committing renewed murder.
All that has been ascertained from testimony given under oath by witnesses Dr. Morgen and Reineeke. Under those circumstances, Gentlemen of the Tribunal, the defense of the Defendant Funk, refuses to use such a piece as a means of evidence. I refuse, therefore, in my capacity of defense counsel for the Defendant Funk, to hear this witness or to examine the said witness brought by the Prosecution as a witness or even to cal him into the witness stand because, definitely, testimony coming from a man who without bothering his conscience, is the direct means of murdering innocent, people -
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, I understand that you are not making an application of any sort now; you are making what is in the nature of a -
DR. SAUTER: No, to the contrary, but I have another application, Mr President, I beg to have your permission to make another application, which is just about to happen. I went on to say then that testimony from a man who, without the least bothering for his conscience, has murdered millions of innocent people has made a business out of murdering people, is in our conception without value for establishing the truth.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal thanks that this is an inappropriate time at which to make a protest of this sort, which is in the nature of an argument. If you are making an application, you can make an application. If you want to make a protest, you must make it later when the case for the organizations is at an end.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, may I make this explanation. We ere about to cone to the end of the submission of evidence, and it is my view that I shouldn't make this application only after the end of the trial but that this application which I am about to make right now must be made now so that the Tribunal will receive it in good time.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, if you would only come to your application we should be glad to hear it.
DR. SAUTER: Very well, Mr. President, right away. Mr. President, just one moment, may I then continue? the affidavit of Oswald Pohl, dated 15th of July, 1946, namely, Document 4045-PS, should not be admitted in evidence against the Defendant Walther Funk, and, secondly, that that part of the contents which has reference to the Defendant Funk of the affidavit of Oswald Pohl, 4045-PS, should be stricken of the record of the session of the 5th of August, 1946. Furthermore, as an additional application and as a precautionary measure, I beg permission that Defendant Walther Funk should be recalled to the witness stand in order to give him the opportunity on his part to make a statement regarding these new statements, this how testimony coming from Oswald Pohl.
Mr. President, I have submitted that application to the General Secretary in writing this morning, but I do not know when the translating division will pass it on to you. I considered it appropriate, however, to beg your permission to make this application orally to you now, so that I cannot be accused of not having done so in good time here during the session, that I had failed to do that. That is the application, Mr. President, which I beg to make.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal would like to hear the Prosecution on this application.
DR. KEMPNER: May I reserve our answer until I have occasion to talk to the Chief prosecutor, Mr. Dodd ?
THE PRESIDENT: Vary well.
DR. KEMPNER: I would like to state that even murderers sometimes tell the truth.
DR. SAUTER: Thank you, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Has the prosecution the wish to crossexamine further the witness ? BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q Mr. Witness, I have two additional questions to ask you, both connected with the activities of operational Group D. You have announced here that you exclude the possibility of your Army Group having; participated in the shooting which has been conducted by this group. I went to know if you knew that the clothes taken off those shot were sent to the Army? cerned, the army quartermaster chief visited me and reported to me that he had received a large consignment of watches that he got from Germany, and also that they were brand new watches from Germany and were to be issued to the troops. As far as receiving watches from Jews who had been shot I don't know anything about that. In no case have I heard of watches belonging to Jews who had been shot. for the German army, right ? dead Jews which were put to death. That's the way I understood you.
A No, that I have not mentioned at all. The chief of army quartermaster reported to me about this consignment of German watches.
That is the only thing I can remember with refer once to watches. That he should have mentioned watches belonging to Jews who had been shot, I consider out of the question.
Q Very well. Have you been aware that in Nikolajev and sinpronopol there were representatives of the special command. ? brought out here in court by the witness Ohlendorf ? Do you think that Ohlendorf testified falsely here when relating this fact ?
A I know Ohlendorf's testimony and I remember that he said that there had been shooting near Sinpronopol during which soldiers had participated. But, he also said that he didn't know for certain what it was. He thought they were followers of the Army. In any event, I never heard anything whilst I was in the Crimea area about soldiers participating in the shooting of Jews.
Q I would like you to answer this question. Do you call Ohlendorf's testimony false or do you consider it correct ? To me, it is quite certain, so far as I am concerned, that units of my Army did not participate in the shooting of Jews. What he said about Army followers and what he means by that, I don't know. commanded. Also, don't you know that over 190,000 persons, the inhabitants of Kiev, were exterminated by the German Police, including over 100,000 people that were put to death in the suburbs of that area alone? Russian prosecution.
Q But you were aware of this type of mass extermination?
ing took place it did not belong in my area. ust, 1941 by the OKW, signed by Quartermaster Chief Wagner, forbidding the feeding of Soviet prisoners-of-war from the Army supplies? Did not this decree result in a mass death from hunger on the part of the Soviet prisoners-of-war ?
AAt present I cannot recall that order. In August 1941, I was the General Commander of an Armored Corps at the front, therefore I could not receive that order. What is more, I cannot imagine that the order in that form was given because we, in our area, did supply food to the prisoners and I do not believe that in our area any prisoners died of hunger. was a tremendous mortality rate from hunger and exhaustion among who prisoners of war of Soviet Russia. You admitted so yourself here yesterday, didn't you ?
A What I said was that it didn't happen in my area, but I read it in the document. After the large battle in the area of Army Group Center, hundreds of thousands of troops were taken, and many had died from starvation because they were half-starved when they emerged from the mountains. And secondly, no Army was in a position to take over the feeding of 1/2 million men quite suddenly. That cannot be carried by an Army because if would naturally result in difficulties. In the first place, the physical condition of the Russian soldiers when they arrived would certainly have led to death in large numbers. This is in reference to the prisoners coming from the valley battles in my area. give such detailed replies. Would you kindly be briefer ? Were you aware of the operation called "Krimhilda" ?
A The code name ''Krimhilda" for an operation is, at the moment, of no meaning to me. Perhaps you will be good enough to tell me what it is, and then perhaps I can recall what it was.
Q I will help you. This was an operation which was planned for the transportation of the German troops from Crimea to the Kuban and it was an original decree from Hitler which was sent to all headquarters and all rear quarters.
A That I did not understand. Do you mean the transfer of the Army from the Crimea to the Kuban or do you mean the retreat from the Crimea ? to the Crimea.
A The retreat, you mean. With that I had nothing to do because that was the task of the Kleist Army and they handled that and that was out of my sphere of influence.
Q And where was your army at the time? sector of the front. You will now be shown a document which might help you to recall what was going on at the time, and I would like to draw your attention to one particular point in the Hitler decree referring to the transfer of troops.
Q Do you remember that decree now? order; actually, it only refers to Army Group A, that is, the army group under Kleist. It is feasible that I did receive a copy but I cannot now today tell you about it; at any rate, I had nothing to do with the order.
Q This decree was sent to all headquarters. That was not the point. I would like you to find the second section of that decree which is entitled "Destructive Measures during the Evacuations;" and please look at point "G" of that section; quoting: "The enemy must take over completely useless and uninhabitable waste territory where mine detonations will occur afterwards." Have you road that place?
Q I must ask you now: In your opinion of a decree of that kind, would you say that it was not motivated by entirely military considerations?
A Yes, in my opinion, this was done purely for military reasons; namely because Hitler -- something which I know -- wanted to get as many of the forces in the Kuban free for other purposes simply because he wanted to use them in other places in the Eastern Front. For the defense of the Crimea he only wanted to leave a minimum of forces there and that was only feasible if a Russian attacking operation coming from the Kuban could, if possible, be suited for a lengthy period or at least made very difficult; thereupon, these orders for destruction were probably issued which in points A, B, C, D, E and F, do in fact only deal with objects which we of military importance; in other words roads, railroads, small railroads, and our production plants.
Q We have the decree before us, Mr. Witness, and you don't have to read it all out loud. I merely asked you to look at point G which talks not about railways and bridges and oil wells but talks generally about reducing the territory of the enemy to complete waste so it wouldn't be usable for the months to come. I am asking you as a soldier --since you call yourself one -- do you approve of a decree of that kind, do you, considering it was caused by entirely military considerations?
That is what I want you to answer.
A Yes, but the order was only given for military reasons; that, I an convinced of and I an equally convinced that letter "G" means that land should be made completely useless for the military conduct of the war. I do not believe, therefore, that the purpose here was to lay waste the land in order to exterminate the population but the military reason was that the land should be rendered useless for the conducting of military operations; that, I do believe.
Q It states here clearly enough what was wanted. I also want to ask you whether you were aware that in May 1944, in Sontgoffen there was a special conference?
THE PRESIDENT: Are you passing from that document?
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: I an going to another question, my Lord.
THE PRESIDENT: I asked you if you were passing from the document.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: That is right.
THE PRESIDENT: I think you should put to him paragraph "3-C".
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: I will. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q Please, witness, look at Section 3 of the decree, Point C. I shall read it into the record: "The ruthless conscription of the civilian population uninfluenced by any false softness for this task, with speedy commencement of work and incorporation into construction battalions, including female construction battalions, must be secured." Do you consider that this also was brought about by purely military considerations? This method of utilization of the civilian population, specifically the female population, do you consider that necessary? a doubt, as far as I am concerned. Whether or not it was nice from a human point of view, that is another question; but I am of the point of view hat the use of the civilian population, including the women, was something we had learned from the Soviet Armies because they did just that to the very largest possible degree.
The creation of anti-tank ditches many kilometers long wouldn't have been possible in so short a period anyway. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. Witness, is it your contention that it is in accordance with the laws of war to turn the females of a country into a construction battalion for the purposes of your army?
A. Whether that is in accordance with the laws of war of 1939, that is not at the moment quite clear to me; that in this war international law was further developed altogether and probably exceeded in many cases, that is an ascertained fact that the use of labor was one of the privileges of an occupying power; that I should like to say is the case even in the case of female labor. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q. You have just stated here that the Red Army widely used the civilian population for constructing various decense constructions. I want to explain to you that the whole Soviet people, including the Soviet women of course, participated in all possible actions against the Germans; but give me an illustration, just one illustration where the Soviet Army utilized German women for purposes of the kind.
A. From wartime, I cannot give you an instance, because after all --
Q. For there weren't any such decrees of the Soviet Army but this decree by Hitler talks of utilizing Soviet women not German women -- Soviet women. All right, now we will go to another question. Have you been aware of the fact that in May 1944 there was a special conference on the part of the generals of the German army about National Socialistic education of the army units?
A. In May 1944 I was no longer in the service so, therefore, I could not have heard anything about this conference.
Q. And you have never heard about the conference?
A. Of that conference I didn't hear, no.
Q. I want to remind you about one fact in connection with that conference. You might have heard about it. At that conference the defendant Keitel, among others, stated that "officers who express any doubt in victory or who criticize the Fuehrer, I shall shoot".
THE PRESIDENT: The witness says he knows nothing about it. Is this a new document you have or not? Is it some new document?
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: No, no. We do have another document, a document with regard to which I find it necessary to ask the witness this question but we are not submitting this document right now because we only just now received it and we do not think it has been translated. I have in mind the affidavits of General Mueller of the German army, who informed us of these facts in his affidavits. If the Tribunal demands, at the end of this evening's session this document will be supplied at that time or at the latest tomorrow morning.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, all I mean is this: If you aren't putting in the document and the witness says he wasn't at the conference and never heard of the conference, I don't think you can put to him what was stated at the conference in order to get that in evidence.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: I have understood you, Mr. President. In that case I will ask another question. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q. Mr. Witness, are you aware that the command of the German navy, already in October 1939, suggested the invasion of Norway; have you been aware of that?
A. No. About that I knew nothing. Of the entire Norwegian affair, I learned as late as when it had become a fact and now, of course; that is to say, from the Indictment, I heard more detailed facts about that but I didn't hear anything earlier.
12 Aug M LJG 4-1 Cumoletti
Q What do you know about an operation coded plan '"Jolka"?
Q I will repeat it. "Jolka" - means "Christmas Tree" in English translation, or "Tannenbaum" in German.
A Oh, Christmas tree? That does not mean anything to me. In July 1940, after the truce and armistice, the Chief of the German General Staff visited von Leeb on the Vistula. General Halder told von Leeb to prepare a plan for the capture of Switzerland. Taking into consideration the fact that the Swiss would resist, the plan was given the code name "Jolka", and it was prepared and submitted to the OKA, the OKW for action. Do you remember that now? to the Channel Coast, and I heard nothing about the plan. the war against the Soviet Union was a " special war", and that you, as other German Generals, acted only as soldiers, and that the so-called "Ideaological" warfare was headed by Hitler and his colleagues. My American colleague reminded you yesterday about your own Decree in which you suggested the annihilation of the Soviet political system and other basic enterprises in other occupied territories. You also said you were aware of the decree of Field Marshal Reichenau about the conduct of the troops required in the East. In your opinion, was the issuance of such decrees conducted by considerations of military and socialistic duty, or other considerations? duty that they were issued. In connection with this, these were appearing in every newspaper. Whose other things certainly did not originate from us. We, with our soldiers, conducted the war in a military manner.
12 Aug M LJG 4-2 Cumoletti was conducted by the fact that such decrees were brought up not by German soldier tradition, but the Hitler kind.?
A That is not quite understood. May I have you give me the sense of the question?
Q. Did you not think that the issuance of such decrees, political decrees really, as the one issued by you, and by Reichenau, did you not think that such decrees were brought about as a result of the fact that the authors were not Generals brought up on the soldier tradition, but Generals brought up on Hitlerian tradition? own personal orders. That I personally have been only a soldier, that I think every one of my subordinates and my superiors will testify to. I have not been a political general, nor am I, shall we say, the National Socialist General which you mean. I have never been that. The order was caused due to the grave danger of the partisans, and to make it clear to our soldiers that they could not afford to be so careless, and it stated the fact that the fight on both sides was a fight of two ideologies. The order is such that it had two different parts. Part one, which deals with the necessity of resisting the attack, and which was to alert the soldiers. That is the order which contains the thoughts about the meaning of this fight. If it speak of the extermination of a system, we mean the political system, not human beings. It is exactly the same as the extermination of the Nationalistic and Socialistic, which is being carried out by the other parties now. The second part contains what must be done. In the second part, It is clearly stated that the soldier would have to avoid any brutal action, and steps are to be taken against any violation of the soldierly honor. This is evident in the fact that I have conducted the fight as a soldier, and not as politician. decree, I am sure the Tribunal will be able to judge the decree and you correctly. My last question, have you been aware of 12 Aug M LJG 4-3 Cumoletti the enterprises which the Supreme Command initiated for the purpose of conducting "biological warfare?
A Did you say biological? Biological warfare? At this moment I do not knew what the expression "biological warfare should mean, and I should beg you therefore to tell me. bacteria for warfare. That is what I mean, by "biological warfare
A No, I knew nothing about that. I have never heard of a war of bacteria or poisoning. plan for biological warfare and then you night recollect some things concerning the plan. I am submitting to the Tribunal, document USSR-510, which consists of the affidavit of Major General of the Medical Corps of the German Army, Walter Schreiber. I am reading it into the record.
"In connection with the trial of the major war criminals in Nurnberg, I, as professor of hygiene and bacteriology of the Military Medical Academy in Berlin and former Major-General, medical corps of the German Army, consider it my duty to our people, who have undergone such severe trials, and to the whole world to disclose one more page of Germany's preparation for war which has not been touched upon in Nurnberg. Together with the former political and military leadership of Germany a large part of the guilt is Bern by the German scientists and first of all by German doctors. Had that type of weapon which was being prepared been used, it would have meant putting to a shameful and evil use the great discoveries of Robert Koch.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Laternser, counsel for the defense, would like to say something.
DR. LATERNSER: I should like to raise an objection. By merely looking through the document, I discovered that the author of these lines is raising particularly serious accusations. I cannot discover in which direction those accusations are being raised, but I should like to state that the author of this document should appear as a witness so I can cross-examine him.