Thirty-Third Day:
Monday, January 14th, 1946
[Page 228]
We must travel this road from our deepest conviction.
The Russian travels along it. We can only maintain
ourselves in this war if we take part in it, with holy
zeal, with all our fanaticism.
[Page 229]
I put in the next document in the document book, D.-640,
which becomes Exhibit GB 186. It is an extract from a speech
on the same subject by the defendant, as Commander-in-Chief
of the Navy, to the Commanders-in-Chief on the 15th
February, 1944. My Lord, it is cumulative except that I
think the last two sentences add something if I might read
them:
... What would have become of our country to-day, if the
Fuehrer had not united us under National Socialism!
Split into parties, beset with the spreading poison of
Jewry and vulnerable to it, and lacking, as a defence,
our present uncompromising world outlook, we would long
since have succumbed to the burdens of this war and been
subject to the merciless destruction of our
adversaries...."
The third extract deals with the introduction of the German
salute into the Armed Forces. I do not think I need read it,
but as the members of the Tribunal will see, it was the
defendant Keitel, and this defendant, who were responsible
for the alteration of the salute in the German Forces and
the adoption of the Nazi salute - together with Goering -
Pardon me, I should have said, the defendants Goering,
Keitel and Donitz.
The next document is a monitored report of the speech made
on the German wireless by this defendant, announcing the
death of Hitler and his own succession. It is D-444. I put
it in to become Exhibit GB 188, and I read a portion of it.
The time is 22.26 hours marked on the document. I read
therefrom:
On the 30th April the Fuehrer nominated Grand Admiral
Donitz to be his successor. The Grand Admiral and
Fuehrer's successor will speak to the German nation." [Page 230]
Apart from his services in building up the U-boat arm, there
is ample evidence that the defendant as Commander-in-Chief
of U-boats, took part in the planning and execution of
aggressive war against Poland, Norway and Denmark. The next
document in the document book, C-126/C, has already been put
in as Exhibit GB 45. It is a memorandum by the defendant
Raeder, dated the 16th May, 1939, and I will call the
attention of the Tribunal to the distribution. The sixth
copy went to the Fuehrer der Unterseeboote, that is to say,
to the defendant Donitz. It is a directive for the invasion
of Poland, "Fall Weiss," and I will not read it. It has
already been read.
The next document, C-126/E, on the second page of that same
document, has also been put in as Exhibit GB 45. It again is
a memorandum from the defendant Raeder's headquarters, dated
the 2nd August, 1939. It is addressed to the Fleet, and then
Flag Officer U-boats - that is, of course, the defendant -
and it is merely a covering letter for operational
directions for the employment of U-boats which are to be
sent into the Atlantic as a precaution in case the intention
of carrying out "Fall Weiss" should remain unchanged. The
second sentence is important:
My Lord, the next document, C-122, has already been put in
as Exhibit GB 82. It is an extract from the War Diary of the
Naval War Staff of the German Admiralty, dated the 3rd
October, 1939, and records the fact that the Chief of the
Naval War Staff has called for views on the possibility of
taking operational bases in Norway. It has already been
read, and I would merely call the Tribunal's attention to
the passage in brackets, in the paragraph marked (d).
Now the next document, C-151, has already been put in as
Exhibit GB 91. It is the defendant's operation order to his
U-boats for the occupation of Denmark and Norway, and the
operation order, which is top secret, dated
[Page 231]
My Lord, I have copies here for the members of the Tribunal.
They have been prepared by the Admiralty. There are two
charts. The first sets out the disposition of the submarines
on the 3rd September, 1939. There is a certification
attached to the chart, in the top left-hand corner, which I
should read:
The second chart sets out the sinkings during the first week
of the war, and the location of the sinking of the Athenia
will be noted. There is a short certification in the left-
hand corner of the Tribunal's copies:
The course of the war waged against neutral and Allied
merchant shipping by the U-boats followed, under the
defendant's directions, a course of consistently increasing
ruthlessness. The defendant displayed his masterly
understanding in adjusting himself to the changing fortunes
of war. From the very early days, merchant ships, both
Allied and neutral, were sunk without warning; and when
operational danger zones had been announced by the German
Admiralty, these sinkings continued to take place both
within and without those zones. With some exceptions in the
early days of the war, no regard was taken for the safety of
the crews or passengers of sunk merchant ships, and the
announcement claiming a total blockade of the British Isles
merely served to confirm the established situation, under
which U-boat warfare was being conducted without regard to
the established rules of international warfare or the
requirements of humanity.
The course of the war at sea during the first eighteen
months is summarised, by two official British reports made
at a time when those who compiled them
[Page 232]
My Lord, I turn to the next document in the document book.
It is D-641 (a), which I put in to become Exhibit GB 191. It
is an extract from an official report of the British Foreign
Office concerning German attacks on merchant shipping during
the period 3rd September, 1939, to September, 1940, that is
to say, the first year of the war, and it was made shortly
after September, 1940.
My Lord, if I might quote from the second paragraph on the
first page:
In the last war the practice of the Central Powers was
so remote from the recognised procedure that it was
thought necessary to set forth once again the Rules of
Warfare, in particular as applied to submarines. This
was done in the Treaty of London, 1930, and in 1936
Germany acceded to the rules. The rules laid down:
(1) In action with regard to merchant ships, submarines
must conform to the rules of International Law to which
surface vessels are subjected.
(2) In particular, except in the case of persistent
refusal to stop on being summoned, or of active
resistance to visit and search, a war ship, whether
surface vessel or submarine, may not sink or render
incapable of navigation a merchant vessel without having
first placed passengers, crew and ships' papers in a
place of safety. For this purpose, the ship's boats are
not regarded as a place of safety unless the safety of
the passengers and crew is assured in the existing sea
and weather conditions, by the proximity of land, or the
presence of another vessel which is in a position to
take them on board." [Page 233]
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Then they were not illegally
sunk, however?
COLONEL PHILLIMORE: Yes, Sir.
[
Previous |
Index |
Next ]
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.
(Part 2 of 5)
[COLONEL PHILLIMORE continues]
"I am a firm adherent of the idea of ideological
education. For what is it in the main? Doing his duty is
a matter of course for the soldier. But the full value,
the whole weight of duty done, is only complete if the
heart and spiritual conviction lend themselves to the
idea. The result of duty done is then quite different
from what it would be if I only carried out my task
literally, obediently and faithfully. It is therefore
necessary for the soldier to support the execution of
his duty with all his mental, all his spiritual energy;
and for this his conviction, his ideology are
indispensable. It is therefore, necessary for us to
train the soldier uniformly, comprehensively, that he
may be adjusted ideologically to our Germany. Every
dualism, every dissension in this connection, or every
divergence or unpreparedness imply a weakness in all
circumstances. He in whom this grows and thrives in
unison is superior to the other. Then, indeed, the whole
importance, the whole weight of his conviction comes
into play. It, is also nonsense to say that the soldier
or the officer must have no politics. The soldier
embodies the State in which he lives, he is the
representative, the articulate exponent of his State. He
must, therefore, stand with his whole weight behind this
State.
My Lord, that last sentence is of importance in connection
with a later document. The Tribunal will see, when I come to
this, that the defendant was not above employing
concentration camp labour for this purpose.
"From the very start the whole of the officer corps must
be so indoctrinated that it feels itself co-responsible
for the National Socialist State in its entirety. The
officer is the exponent of the State, the idle chatter
that the officer is non-political is sheer nonsense."
Now, the next document is 2879-PS, which I put in to become
Exhibit GB 187. It consists of three extracts from speeches.
The first is from a speech made by the defendant to the
German Navy and the German people on Heroes' Day, the 12th
March, 1944.
"German men and women!
My Lord, the next extract is from a speech to the Navy on
the 21st July, 1944. It again shows the defendant's
fanaticism. It is perhaps worth reading the first sentence:
"Men of the Navy! Holy wrath and unlimited anger fill
our hearts because of the criminal attempt which was to
have cost the life of our beloved Fuehrer. Providence
wished it otherwise, watched over and protected our
Fuehrer, and did not abandon our German Fatherland in
the fight for its destiny."
And then he goes on to deal with the fate which should be
meted out to these traitors.
"It has been reported from the Fuehrer's headquarters
that our Fuehrer, Adolf Hitler, has died this afternoon
in his battle headquarters at the: Reich Chancellery,
fallen for Germany, fighting to the last breath against
Bolshevism.
"German men and women, soldiers of the German Armed
Forces. Our Fuehrer, Adolf Hitler, is dead. The German
people bow in deepest sorrow and respect. Early he had
recognised the terrible danger of Bolshevism and had
dedicated his life to the fight against it. His fight
having ended, he died a hero's death in the capital of
the German Reich, after having led an unmistakably
straight and steady life."
Then, that document also contains an order of the day issued
by the defendant, which is very much to the same effect.
"Flag Officer U-boats is handing in his operational
orders to SKL" - that is, the Seekriegsleitung, the
German Admiralty - "by 12th August. A decision on the
sailings of U-boats for the Atlantic will probably be
made in the middle of August."
The next document, C-172, I put in as Exhibit GB 189. It
consists of the defendant's own operational instructions to
his U-boats for the operation "Fall Weiss." It is signed by
him. It is not dated, but it is clear from the subject-
matter that its date must be before the 16th July, 1939. I
do not think the substance of the document adds anything. It
is purely an operational instruction, giving effect to the
document already put in, C-126/6, the directive by Raeder.
"Flag Officer U-boats already considers such harbours
extremely useful as equipment and supply bases for
Atlantic U-boats to call at temporarily."
The next document, C-5, has already been put in as Exhibit
GB 83. This in from the defendant, as Flag Officer U-boats,
addressed to the Supreme Command of the Navy, the Naval War
Staff. It is dated the 9th October, 1939, and it sets out
the defendant's view on the advantages of Trondheim and
Narvik as bases. The document proposes the establishment of
a base at Trondheim with Narvik as an alternative.
"The naval force will, as they enter the harbour, fly
the British flag until the troops have landed, except
presumably at Narvik."
The preparations for war against England are perhaps best
shown by the disposition of the U-boats under his command on
the 3rd September, 1939, when war broke out between Germany
and the Western Allies. The locations, of the sinkings in
the following week, including that of the Athenia which will
be dealt with by my learned friend, Major Elwyn Jones,
provide corroboration. On that, I would put in two charts; I
put them in as D-652, and they become Exhibit GB 190.
"This chart has been constructed from a study of the
orders issued by Donitz between 21st August, 1939, and
3rd September, 1939, and subsequently captured. The
chart shows the approximate disposition of submarines
ordered for 3rd September, 1939, and cannot be
guaranteed accurate in every detail, as the file of
captured orders are clearly not complete, and some of
the submarines shown apparently had received orders at
sea on or about 3rd September to move to new operational
areas. The documents from which this chart was
constructed are held by the British Admiralty in
London."
My Lord, there are two points I would make on that first
chart. First, it will be apparent to members of the Tribunal
that U-boats which were in those positions on the 3rd
September, 1939, had left Kiel some considerable time
before. The other point which I would make is important in
connection with my learned friend Major Elwyn Jones' case
against the defendant Raeder, and that is the location of
the U-boat U-30. The members of the Tribunal may care to
bear it in mind while looking at the charts now.
"This chart has been constructed from the official
records of the British Admiralty in London. It shows the
position and sinkings of the British merchant vessels
lost by enemy in the seven days subsequent to 3rd
September, 1939."
My Lord, I turn to the defendant's participation in War
Crimes and Crimes, against Humanity.
"During the first twelve months of the war, 2,081,062
tons of Allied shipping comprising 508 ships have been
lost by enemy action. In addition, 769,213 tons of
neutral shipping, comprising 253 ships, have also been
lost. Nearly all these merchant ships have been sunk by
submarine, mine, aircraft or surface craft, and the
great majority of them were sunk while engaged on their
lawful trading voyages. 2,836 Allied merchant seamen
have lost their lives in these ships.
Then, the next paragraph:
"At the beginning of the present war, Germany issued a
Prize Ordinance for the regulation of sea warfare and
the guidance of her naval officers. Article 74 of this
ordinance embodies the submarine rules of the London
Treaty. Article 72, however, provides that captured
enemy vessels may be destroyed if it seems inexpedient
or unsafe to bring them into port, and Article 73/(1)
and (2) makes the same provision with regard to neutral
vessels which are captured for sailing under enemy
convoy, for forcible resistance, or for giving
assistance to the enemy. These provisions are certainly
not in accordance with the traditional British view, but
the important point is that, even in these cases, the
Prize Ordinance envisages the capture of the merchantman
before its destruction. In other words, if the Germans
adhered to the rules set out in their own Prize
Ordinance, we might have argued the rather fine legal
point with them, but we should have no quarrel with
them, either on the broader legal issue or on the
humanitarian one. In the event, however, it is only too
clear that almost from the beginning of the war the
Germans abandoned their own principle, and waged war
with steady disregard for International Law, and for
what is, after all, the ultimate sanction of all law,
the protection of human life and property from arbitrary
and ruthless attacks."
I pass to the third paragraph on the next page which sets
out two instances:
"On the 30th September, 1939, came the first sinking of
a neutral ship by a submarine without warning and with
loss of Life. This was the Danish ship Vendia bound for
the Clyde in ballast. The submarine fired two shots and
shortly after torpedoed the ship. The torpedo was
And then dealing with attacks on Allied merchant vessels,
certain figures are given.
Ships sunk.................241
At least 79 of these 112 ships were torpedoed without
warning.
Recorded attacks......221
Illegal attacks.............112