The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: imt/tgmwc//tgmwc-21/tgmwc-21-208.03


Archive/File: imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-21/tgmwc-21-208.03
Last-Modified: 2000/12/18

DR. PELCKMANN: Your Lordship, I regret very much that the
translation of the summary is not at hand. It would, of
course, greatly facilitate the understanding and the
grouping of this material. Group V deals with statements
concerning the general ignorance of the bulk of the SS
membership, 96,257 affidavits being at our disposal. They
tell us that the majority of the members of the SS knew
nothing about the crimes attributed to them before the
capitulation. They say that in general, but they
particularize when they deal with the various types of
crimes concerned. One fact is specially significant in this
connection and is particularly emphasized. At the time when
these crimes assumed a larger scale, that is, during the
war, the mass of the SS was fighting at the front; and for
that reason alone it could not have any knowledge of
incidents of that sort, for the information of the man at
the front is extremely limited, as experience teaches.

Next comes Group VI. It deals with the assertion made by the
prosecution that the SS had been a unit. The first question
is whether the branch organizations formed an actual unit.
There are 5.700  affidavits dealing with this question. One-
half shows that a conscious effort towards unification for
purposes of carrying through a conspiracy was totally
lacking. The other half refers to the fact that the Waffen
SS was not basically recruited from the General SS.
Therefore, it emphasises the separation between the General
SS and the Waffen SS. The second question is whether the
members of the various branch organizations knew of the
activities carried out by the other branches. The
significance of the question could not be recognized by the
members of the SS without a previous explanation, and
therefore few of the affidavits deal with it. Those few
affidavits that we have concerning that activity of the
various main offices of the SS confirm that they were set up
separately, and that a personnel union existed only in the
person of Himmler himself.

Several affidavits refer to the fact that, for instance, the
personnel of the concentration camps were made up of the
most diverse groups and components. Many affidavits
emphasize that the state of secrecy which had been ordered,
as for example, by the Fuehrer Decree Number One, which has
been quoted frequently, and also through special directives,
prohibited a close co-operation of the various branches of
the SS. In some other affidavits it is said that the General
SS on the one hand, and the police and the SD on the other,
did not form a joint body.

Very informative are the affidavits which deal with the
components of the Leibstandarte, 1934. Less than ten per
cent of the members of this Leibstandarte were at the same
time members of the General SS. A large number of these
affidavits state that during the war, practically speaking,
the General SS did not exist. Three hundred and forty-two
affidavits deal with numerous affiliated groups or branches
of the SS. These, in truth, only exercised activities of a
definite, specialized character; they were not concerned
with carrying through the alleged SS activities, and had
only a loose connection with the General SS. Among these
groups we find the SS mounted units, the Reitersturme, who
devoted themselves to motor riding; SS female helpers, who,
like the Wehrmacht female helpers, were only used during the
war in intelligence and information service; others were the
SS sport organizations, the Lebenshorn, the medical units,
front units of the German Reichspost, signal units; and so
forth.

Affidavits of Group VII, numbering 3,174, deal with the
question of the SS attitude toward the Church. On the basis
of their positive statements, these show

                                                  [Page 322]

that, according to their conviction, a persecution of the
Church was not intended by the SS leadership.

Under VIII there are 127 affidavits grouped together which
testify to the fact that many offices under Himmler had no
connection with the SS and, further, that between Himmler
and the SS an estrangement had arisen especially in the
course of the war.

Under IX, 435 affidavits are summarised. They deal with the
behaviour of our enemies during the war and after the
capitulation. These affidavits, based on the experience of
the SS men, contain statements about actions contrary to
International Law which the enemy perpetrated in combat.
Names of places are given, as are theatres of war,
nationality of the enemy, and the kind of excesses that
occurred. The enumeration is intended to show that excesses
of this kind can hardly be prevented during war and that for
that reason one cannot conclude that excesses were
systematized. They serve the purpose of showing that the
German troops, and especially the Waffen SS, if they are
confronted with isolated cases of violations of
International Law, which some of the affidavits say were
punished, cannot be charged with having acted according to a
system.

The last group is X. It contains 57 affidavits which
reproduce the actual personal impressions of foreigners
about the SS. From the recognition given by these
foreigners, which was known within the SS, the individual SS
man concluded that the general behaviour of the SS could not
be criminal, and that its activity was not objected to by
the world as a whole. Various personalities are mentioned in
relation to certain incidents; the opinions of prominent
Americans, Englishmen and Russians are given, such as
Daladier, Chamberlain, Lord Rothermere, Chaim Weitzmann, and
others.

Finally, I should like to submit, but without going into a
detailed explanation of it, a statistical record, set up on
the basis of a circular.

With that, my Lord, I have concluded the submission of
affidavits and documents.

THE PRESIDENT: Are you next, Dr. Laternser?

DR. LATERNSER (counsel for the General Staff and the OKW):
First of all, I should like to submit the list of the
fourteen witnesses whose testimony I expect to use, as well
as the transcripts dealing with their interrogations.

Moreover, I have a complete list of the affidavits submitted
to the Commissions, and I have submitted this list. An
English translation of it, contained in one volume, has been
placed before the High Tribunal. It is the list which has
been referred to this morning by the President. I made an
orderly compilation of the subject matter, and have supplied
this list with an index. The numbers of the affidavits are
given, as are the names of the deponents and a brief
description of the contents of the affidavits. In this way
the rather comprehensive and, in my opinion, especially
valuable evidence is easily understandable.

The basis for the judgement of the circle of persons accused
is the organization and structure of the highest Wehrmacht
leadership. For this purpose I should like to submit
Document Mil. No. 2, which you will find on Pages 12 and 13
of the first volume of the document book. From the diagram
on Page 13 we can see the actual method of ranking from the
highest Wehrmacht leadership. I need this document as
counter-evidence because the drafts of the Wehrmacht
leadership submitted by the prosecution - Exhibits USA 531
and 532 - are not correct in various points and have led
again and again to misunderstandings.

Concerning those mainly responsible for the conduct of the
war, I should like to submit Document Mil. No. 3. This
contains a rather large diagram.

The diagram on Page 13 shows the structure, and I should
like to show in what manner the responsibility for the
conduct of the war was shared between the military leaders
and the other organs. From this diagram we see, first of
all, that a clear distinction must be made between the
military leadership of this war and

                                                  [Page 323]

the ideological political conduct of the war which was
undertaken by Hitler and his various agencies. You will find
the markings in blue for the military leaders, and for the
sphere of the ideological and political leadership in red.

The diagram shows also the distribution of command and,
thus, of responsibility between military and political
leaders. The tasks which the military leaders had are marked
in blue, and those which were entrusted to others are marked
in red. This diagram shows further what tasks, even though
they were in the spheres of the military leaders, were
carried through on the responsibility of other agencies and
offices in the operational territories which were under
military jurisdiction. Thus we see an undermining, of the
authority of the military leaders even in the operational
zones. A distribution of authority according to areas, and
therewith a sharing of responsibility, is also shown in this
diagram. Only the clearly defined operational areas were
under the jurisdiction of the military leaders, and only for
the time the operations were in progress. In all other
fields the executive power was purely and solely in the
hands of the political leadership, and these functions are
indicated in red. Just one more remark in connection with
this diagram: The areas outlined in black and dealing with
the responsibility of the Wehrmacht commanders do not
involve the circle of people accused, for these military
commanders do not come within the sphere of the Indictment.

The authenticity of the diagram is affirmed and sworn to by
General Winter of the Wehrmachts Fuehrungsstab - the
Wehrmacht Operational Staff.

Since I have given the structure of the Wehrmacht leadership
to build upon, I shall turn to the circle of accused persons
and its composition. The prosecution has -

THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Laternser, the Tribunal would like to
know whether there are three colours indicated in this
diagram: namely, blue for the armed forces, red for the
political forces, and an indiscriminate colour, a mixture of
red and blue and black - for an indeterminate body which is
half political and half military.

DR. LATERNSER: Yes, Mr. President, that is quite true. The
third colour is supposed to be black, and these areas
indicated in black show the areas of the Wehrmacht and
military Commanders-in-Chief. They are not men who had their
commands at the front, but rather Commanders-in-Chief who
had a certain territorial power, and I added that this kind
of Commander-in-Chief, such as is indicated in black, does
not come within the circle of persons accused.

THE PRESIDENT: Do you mean that in what you call black are
included the static military commands, non-operational? You
do not mean there is anything political in the black?

DR. LATERNSER: No. But, Mr. President, those who had this
power of command cannot be included among the people who are
accused under the Indictment.

The prosecution has set up a list of the circle of persons
accused in Exhibit USA 778. This may be found on Pages 15-22
of my document book. This list comprises 129 persons. I
should like to submit Document Mil. 4 in which three tables
are shown. These tables are set up in accordance with
Exhibit USA 778.

First of all, turn to Table I, please. It is on Page 24 of
the document book. From this table we see that on 1st March,
1933, only one of the leaders indicted was in a high
position.

2. On 1st March, 1938, there were only seven.

3. On 1st September, 1939, that is, at the outbreak of the
war, there were twenty-two.

4. This is an important point as may be seen from column
eight. In November, 1944, the top figure of fifty-two was
reached.

5. Only nine generals and admirals were in one of the
indicted positions during the entire war.

                                                  [Page 324]

Table 2 is found on Page 25. It is a graphic presentation
dealing with the duration of membership of the accused
generals in the alleged group. You can see from columns 2 to
5 that a long membership was something exceptional. You can
see from column 9 that the top figure of 21 had a position
falling under the Indictment for only 2-2 1/2 years; whereas
the total of sixty-one people only belonged to the alleged
group for a period of less than one year. This figure of
sixty-one results from the additions of columns twelve to
eighteen.

Table 3 found on Page 26 of the document book shows,
especially through columns four and five, that out of 129
generals and admirals, one hundred served for less than two
years in high positions, that is to say the large majority
of the military leaders involved.

I now submit Document Mil. 6. It is found on Pages 27 to 33
of my Document Book I. This document comprises a list of
names of the various leaders involved. From this list we can
see just how many of the military leaders, at the time when
important events took place, held positions which fall under
the Indictment.

Then from Pages 27 and 29 you will see: (1) on 1st March,
1933, that is at the time of the assumption of power, one
general. (2) on 5th February, 1938, which is the key date in
the Indictment against the military personnel, only six
generals, and (3) on 1st September, 1939, 23 generals in the
list drawn up by the prosecution were in positions falling
under this Indictment. Above all it is remarkable that on
1st November, 1944, when we were mainly concerned with the
defence of our frontiers, the highest membership in this
group was reached, 49 generals in all.

With Document Mil. 7, a copy of which is found on Pages 34
to 40 of Document Book 1, I should like to give you a
different perspective of the people involved. The list on
Pages 36 to 40 shows the membership of the alleged "group"
during certain periods. From the first column we can see
that before June, 1941, 33 generals had been in positions
which the Indictment covers. Only 21 of that group are still
alive. Up to February, 1943, that is during the period when
offensive operations were still being carried out, 27 other
generals were in such positions as are covered by the
Indictment. From February, 1943, until the end of the war,
which was the period of strategic defence -

THE PRESIDENT: You said something about only a certain
number of them being alive. That is not shown by the table,
is it?

DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, that will be seen from another
chart to which I will refer later. I was just saying that in
the last period, from February, 1943 until the end of the
war, an additional 69 military leaders were in positions
coming under the Indictment. With this document I should
like to prove, first of all, that out of the 129 officers
indicted, only 33, that is 25 per cent, participated in the
preparation for war, and were the only ones who could have
done so.

2. 69 generals, which is more than 50 per cent of the group
involved, cannot have participated in plans of aggression.

3. 40 generals, which is 30 per cent, only found themselves
in positions which are now under indictment when it was a
question of defending the Fatherland's frontiers.

From No. 5 on Page 35 you will be able to see that out of
129 generals only 80 had formerly been members of the
General Staff.

I shall now turn to Document Mil. 8, which may be found on
Pages 41 to 48 of my Document Book No. I. Through this
document I should like to bring proofs of a varied nature:

(1) From the first three columns of list 3, which art found
on Pages 43 to 48, you will be able to see the number of
dead, the number of those who are indicted individually or
have been indicted, and the number of those officers who
were only charged with the command of an army, and therefore
did not definitely hold a position which falls under the
Indictment. The sum total of these three columns

                                                  [Page 325]

is 56, as can be seen from Page 41, and in this way the
number of 129 officers involved is reduced, and thereby also
the practical consequences of a sentence which can only
affect 73 people at the most.

(2) The last two columns of my list give the number of those
officers who, before the end of the war, had lost their
positions either through an order, death, or because they
were captured. Seventy admirals and generals make up this
number out of the total figure of 129. And in this
connection -

THE PRESIDENT: I do not think it very much matters, but the
last column which contains the reason does not seem to
accord with the evidence which has been given to us up to
date. Perhaps it is a mistranslation. I do not know. I am
referring to Field-Marshal von Brauchitsch and the reason
given in the last column.

DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, I intend to explain these two
columns and tell the High Tribunal who in this list fell
into disgrace. My intention was to give this explanation to
the High Tribunal. I wanted to call the attention of the
High Tribunal to the fact that it can be seen from the last
two columns that 36 generals, because of serious differences
of opinion with Hitler or because of active resistance
against Hitler, were removed from their positions. As can be
seen from the explanatory affidavit attached to the list,
those who fell into disgrace did so because of serious
differences of opinion between themselves and Hitler.

THE PRESIDENT: All I wish to say is that no such suggestion
was made to Field-Marshal von Brauchitsch when he was in the
witness box.

DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, I do believe that I can
remember that he talked about serious differences of opinion
between himself and Hitler.

In this figure of 36 generals who were removed from their
positions because of differences of opinion is included, as
may be seen from the list, General Hoeppner, who was
sentenced to death for having participated in the affair of
20th July, 1944. That may be seen from the last two columns,
and I wanted to call the attention of the High Tribunal in
this connection to the fact that this is the same General
who, in the opinion of the author of Document L-180,
allegedly had a very close collaboration with Einsatzgruppe
A.

Now I should like to submit Document Mil. 9, which will be
found on Pages 49 to 54 of the Document Book No. I. I shall
merely point out that this list contains the names of those
31 officers who served less than six months in positions
which are included in the Indictment. Most of these
officers, as may be seen from this list, had not been
appointed Commanders-in-Chief (Oberbefehlshaber), but had
been entrusted with matters of administration.

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.