Chapter XXII: Part I: , Page 713 (14)

“Details of the operational and deployment plans were discussed
by the OKH with the commanders-in-chief of the army groups and
armies and with the chiefs of staff of these commanders. During
the operations the OKH maintained a constant exchange of ideas
with the army groups by means of telephone, radio, and courier.
The Commander-in-Chief of the Army used every opportunity to
maintain a personal exchange of ideas with the commanders of
army groups, armies, and lower echelons by means of personal
visits to them.

“In the war against Russia the commanders of army groups and
armies were individually and repeatedly called in by Hitler for
report. Orders for all operational matters went from the OKH to
army groups, and for all matters concerning supply and
territorial executive power from the OKH directly to the armies.
Signed: Von Brauchitsch.”

The Oberbefehlshaber in the field, therefore—and in the case of the Army that means the commanders-in-chief of army groups and armies—participated in planning and directing the execution of the plans, as those affidavits show. The Oberbefehlshaber were also the repositories of general executive powers in the areas in which their army groups and armies were operating. In this connection I invite the Court’s attention to Document 447-PS, which is already in evidence as Exhibit Number USA-135, this being a directive of 13 March 1941 signed by Keitel and issued by the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces. This directive sets out various regulations for the operations against the Soviet Union which were actually begun a few months later on 22 June. The documents, Your Honor, are in numerical order in Document Books II and III. Document Book II contains C and L; Document Book III contains PS; and this, being 447-PS, will be in Document Book III in numerical order within the PS’s. And within that Document, under Paragraph I, the paragraph entitled “Area of Operations and Executive Power” (“Vollziehende Gewalt”), the Tribunal will find Subparagraph 1, in which the following appears—that is Page 1 of the translation, Paragraph 2:

“It is not contemplated to declare East Prussia and the
Government General an area of operations. However, in accordance
with the unpublished Führer orders from 19 and 21 October 1939,
the Commander-in-Chief of the Army shall be authorized to take
all measures necessary for the execution of his military aim and
for the safeguarding of the troops. He may transfer his
authority to the commanders-in-chief”—that, in the original
German, is Oberbefehlshaber—“of the army groups and armies.
Orders of that kind have priority over all other obligations and
over orders issued by civilian agencies.”

Your Honors will see that this executive power, with priority over civilian agencies, was vested in the Commander-in-Chief of the Army with authority to transfer it to commanders-in-chief of army groups or armies—to the members of the group as defined in the Indictment.

Further on in the document, under Subparagraph 2(a), the document states—that is the fourth paragraph, on Page 1 of the document:

“The area of operations of the Army created through the advance
of the Army beyond the frontiers of the Reich and the
neighboring countries is to be limited in depth as far as
possible. The Commander-in-Chief of the Army has the right to
exercise the executive power”—vollziehende Gewalt—“in this
area, and may transfer his authority to the
commanders-in-chief”—Oberbefehlshaber—“of the army groups and
armies.”

THE PRESIDENT: This would be a convenient time to break off.

[_A recess was taken until 1400 hours._]

_Afternoon Session_

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will sit tomorrow in closed session to consider matters of procedure, and there will therefore be no public session tomorrow.

COL. TAYLOR: Your Lordship, I have just one more document dealing with this subject of the structure of the group before passing on to the substantive charges of criminality.

This document is C-78, which is already in evidence as Exhibit Number USA-139. That will be found in Volume II of the document book. This document is the official command invitation to participate in the consultation at the Reich Chancellery on 14 June 1941, 8 days prior to the attack on the Soviet Union. This is one of the meetings that was referred to in the last paragraph of the affidavits by Halder and Von Brauchitsch, which were read into the record this morning. It is signed by Colonel Schmundt, the chief Wehrmacht adjutant to Hitler, and is dated at Berchtesgaden, 9 June 1941. It begins:

“In re: Conference Barbarossa”—that being the code for the
attack on the Soviet Union—“the Führer and Supreme Commander of
the Armed Forces has ordered reports on Barbarossa by the
commanders of army groups and armies and naval and air
commanders of equal rank.”

That is, as the Tribunal will see once again, the very group specified in the bottom line of the chart on the wall, army groups, armies, naval, and air commanders of similar rank.

This document likewise includes a list of the participants in this conference, and I would just like in closing on this subject to run through that list to point out who the participants in this conference were and how closely they parallel the structure of the group as we find it in the Indictment. The Tribunal will see that the list of participants begins at the foot of Page 1 of the translation:

General Field Marshal Von Brauchitsch, who was the Commander-in-Chief of the Army and a member of the group; General Halder, who was Chief of the Army Staff and a member of the group; then three subordinates, who were not members of the group: Paulus, Heusinger, and Gyldenfeldt.

Navy: Captain Wagner, who was Chief of the Operations Staff, Operations Division of the naval war staff, not a member of the group. On the air side: General Milch, State Secretary and General Inspector of the Air Force, again not a member of the group; Jeschonnek, Chief of the General Staff of the Air Force and a member of the group; and two of his assistants.

Passing over the page to the OKW, High Command of the Armed Forces, we find Keitel, Jodl, Warlimont, all members of the group, were present, with an assistant from the General Staff.

Then four officers from the office of the adjutant, who were not members of the group.

Then we pass to the officers from the field commands: General Von Falkenhorst, Army High Command, Norway, member of the group; General Stumpff, Air Fleet 5, member of the group; Rundstedt, Reichenau, Stülpnagel, Schober, Kleist, all from the Army, all members of the group.

Air Force: General Löhr, Air Fleet 4, member of the group. General Fromm and General Udet were not members. One was director of the home forces, commander of the home forces, and the other the Director General of Equipment and Supply, G.A.F.

The Navy: Raeder, a member of the group; Fricke, chief of the naval war staff, and a member of the group; and a personal assistant who was not a member; Carls, Naval Group North, a member of the group, likewise Schmundt.

Then from the Army: Leeb, Busch, Küchler, all members of the group as Oberbefehlshaber; Keller, a member of the group; Bock, Kluge, Strauss, Guderian, Hoth, Kesselring, all members of the group.

And it will accordingly be seen that except for a few assisting officers of relatively junior rank, all the participants in these consultations were members of the group as defined in the Indictment and that in fact the participants included almost all the members of the group who were concerned in the impending operation against the Soviet Union.

I have now concluded the first part of the presentation, to wit, the description of the General Staff and High Command group and its composition and structure and general manner of functioning. I turn now to the charges levelled against this group in the Indictment.

Appendix B charges that this group had a major responsibility for the planning, preparation, initiation, and waging of the illegal wars set forth in Counts One and Two and for the War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity detailed in Counts Three and Four.

In presenting the evidence in support of these charges we must keep in mind that under the Charter the group may be declared criminal in connection with any acts of which an individual defendant who was a member of the group may be convicted.

The General Staff and High Command group is well represented among the individual defendants in this case. Five of the individual defendants, or one-quarter of the individuals here, are members of the group.

Taking them in the order in which they are listed, the first is the Defendant Göring. Göring is a defendant in this case in numerous capacities. He is a member of the General Staff and High Command group by reason of having been Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force from the time when the Air Force first came into the open and was officially established until about 1 month prior to the end of war. During the last month of the war he was replaced in this capacity by Von Greim, who committed suicide shortly after his capture at the end of the war. Göring is charged with crimes under all Counts of the Indictment.

The next listed defendant who is a member of the group is Keitel. He and the remaining three defendants are, all four of them, in this case primarily or solely in their military capacities, and all four of them are professional soldiers or sailors.

Keitel was made chief of the High Command of the German Armed Forces, or OKW, when the OKW was first set up in 1938 and he remained in that capacity throughout the period in question. He held the rank of Field Marshal throughout most of this period, and in addition to being the Chief of the OKW, he was a member of the Secret Cabinet Council and of the Council of Ministers for the Defense of the Reich. Keitel is charged with crimes under all four Counts.

The Defendant Jodl was a career soldier. He was an Oberstleutnant, or lieutenant colonel, when the Nazis came to power and ultimately attained the rank of Generaloberst or colonel general. He became the Chief of the Operations Staff of the Wehrmacht and continued in that capacity throughout the war. He also is charged with crimes under all four counts.

The other two defendants who are members of this group are on the nautical side. The Defendant Raeder is in a sense the senior member of the entire group, having been Commander-in-Chief of the German Navy as early as 1928. He attained the highest rank in the German Navy, Grossadmiral. He retired from the Supreme Command of the Navy in 1943, in January, and was replaced by Dönitz. Raeder is charged under Counts One, Two, and Three of the Indictment.

The last of the five defendants, Dönitz, was a relatively junior officer when the Nazis came to power. During the early years of the Nazi regime, he specialized in submarine activities and was in command of the U-boat arm when the war broke out. He rose steadily in the Navy and was chosen to succeed Raeder when the latter retired in 1943. He then became Commander-in-Chief of the Navy and attained the rank of Grossadmiral. When the German Armed Forces collapsed near the end of the war, Dönitz succeeded Hitler as head of the German Government. He is charged under Counts One, Two, and Three of the Indictment.

Four of these five defendants are reasonably typical of the group as a whole. We must except the Defendant Göring who is primarily a Nazi Party politician nourishing a hobby for aviation as a result of his career in 1914-18. But the other four made soldiering or sailoring their life work. They collaborated with and joined in the most important adventures of the Nazis, but they were not among the early Party members. They differ in no essential respects from the other 125 members of the group. They are, no doubt, abler men in certain respects. They rose to the highest position in the German Armed Forces, and all but Jodl attained highest rank.

But they will serve as excellent case studies and as representatives of the group, and we can examine their ideas as they have expressed them in these documents and their actions, with fair assurance that these ideas and actions are characteristic of the other group members.

I turn first to the criminal activities of the General Staff and High Command group under Counts One and Two of the Indictment, their activities in planning and conspiring to wage illegal wars. Here my task is largely one of recapitulation. The general body of proof relating to aggressive war has already been laid before the Tribunal by my colleague, Mr. Alderman, and the distinguished members of the British Delegation.

Many of the documents to which they drew the Tribunal’s attention showed that the defendants here who were members of the General Staff and High Command group participated knowingly and wilfully in crimes under Counts One and Two. I propose to avoid referring again to that evidence so far as I possibly can, but I must refer to one or two of them again to focus the Tribunal’s attention on the part which the General Staff and High Command group played in aggressive War Crimes.

Now it is, of course, the normal function of a military staff to prepare military plans. In peacetime, military staffs customarily concern themselves with the preparation of plans for attack or defense based on hypothetical contingencies. There is nothing criminal about carrying on these exercises or preparing these plans. That is not what the defendants and this group are charged with.

We will show that the group agreed with the Nazi objective of aggrandizing Germany by threat of force or force itself, and that they joined knowingly and enthusiastically in developing German armed might for this purpose. They were advised in advance of the Nazi plans to launch aggressive wars. They laid the military plans and directed the initiation and carrying on of the wars. These things we believe to be criminal under Article 6 of the Charter.

Aggressive war cannot be prepared or waged without intense activity on the part of all branches of the armed forces, and particularly by the high-ranking officers who control these forces. To the extent, therefore, that German preparation for and the waging of aggressive war are historical facts of common knowledge, or are already proved, it necessarily follows that the General Staff and High Command group, and the German Armed Forces, participated therein.

This is so notwithstanding the effort on the part of certain German military leaders to insist that until the troops marched they lived in an ivory tower unwilling to see the direction to which their work led.

The documents to which I will refer fully refute this, and moreover some of these men now fully admit they participated gladly with the Nazis, because the Nazi aims coincided closely with their own.

I think that the documents which Mr. Alderman read into the transcript already adequately reflect the purposes and objectives of the German General Staff and High Command group during the period prior to the absorption of Austria. During this period occurred, as is charged in the Indictment, firstly, secret rearmament, including the training of military personnel, the production of war munitions, and building of an air force; secondly, the Göring announcement on 10 March 1935 that Germany was building a military air force; thirdly, the law for compulsory military service of 16 March 1935, fixing the peacetime strength of the German Army at 500,000; and finally, and fourthly, the reoccupation of the Rhineland on 7 March 1936 and the refortification of that area.

Those particular facts do not require judicial proof. They are historical facts, and likewise the fact that it would have been impossible for the Nazis to achieve these things without co-operation by the Armed Forces is indisputable from the very nature of things.

Mr. Alderman described to the Tribunal and read from numerous documents which illustrate these events. He included numerous documents concerning the secret expansion of the German Navy in violation of treaty limitations, under the guidance of the Defendant Raeder.

He also read the secret Reich Defense Law, Document 2261-PS, already in the record as Exhibit Number USA-24, which was adopted on the same day that Germany unilaterally renounced the armament provisions of the Versailles Treaty. He read Von Blomberg’s plan, dated 2 May 1935, for the reoccupation of the Rhineland—that is Document C-159, Exhibit Number USA-54—and Blomberg’s orders under which the reoccupation was actually carried out.

All these events, by obvious inference, required the closest collaboration between the military leaders and the Nazis. I need not labor that point further.

But it is worth while, I think, to re-examine one or two of the documents which show the state of mind and the objectives of the German military leaders during this early period. One document read from by Mr. Alderman which reflects the viewpoint of the German Navy on the opportunities which Nazism accorded for rearmament so that Germany could achieve its objectives by force or threat of force is a memorandum published by the High Command of the German Navy in 1937, entitled _The Fight of the Navy against Versailles_. That is Document C-156, Exhibit Number USA-41. The Tribunal will recall that this memorandum, this official publication of the German Navy, stated that only with the assistance of Hitler had it been possible to create the conditions for rearmament. The Defendant Jodl has stated this, better than I could possibly put it, in his speech to the Gauleiter on 7 November 1943. That is in Document L-172, Exhibit Number USA-34, from which Mr. Alderman read at length.

Nor were the high-ranking German officers unaware that the policies and objectives of the Nazis were leading Germany in the direction of war. I invite the Court’s attention to Document C-23, which is already in the record as Exhibit Number USA-49. This consists of some notes made by Admiral Carls of the German Navy in September 1938. These notes were written by Admiral Carls by way of comment on a “Draft Study of Naval Warfare against England” and they read in part as follows—that will be found, Your Lordship, on Page 3 of the translation of Document C-23:

“There is full agreement with the main theme of the study.

“1. If, according to the Führer’s decision, Germany is to
acquire a position as a world power guaranteed by its own
strength, she needs not only sufficient colonial possessions but
also secure naval communications and secure access to the ocean.

“2. Both requirements can be fulfilled only in opposition to
Anglo-French interests and would limit their position as world
powers. It is unlikely that they can be achieved by peaceful
means. The decision to make Germany a world power therefore
forces upon us the necessity of making corresponding
preparations for war.

“3. War against England means at the same time war against the
Empire, against France, probably against Russia as well, and a
large number of countries overseas; in fact, against one-half to
one-third of the whole world.

“It can be justified and have a chance of success only if it is
prepared economically as well as politically and militarily, and
waged with the aim of conquering for Germany an outlet to the
ocean.”

Let us turn to the Air Force, having seen what the viewpoint of the Navy was. Parts of the German Air Staff during this pre-war period were developing even more radically aggressive plans for the aggrandizement of the Reich. Document L-43, Exhibit Number GB-29, is a study prepared by the chief of a branch of the General Staff of the Air Force called the Organization Staff. The study in question is a recommendation for the organization of the German Air Force in future years up to 1950. The recommendation is based on certain assumptions, and one assumption was that by 1950 the frontiers of Germany would be as shown on the map which was attached as an enclosure to this study. There is only one copy of the map available, Your Honor.

The Court will note on this map that Austria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, and the Baltic coast up to the Gulf of Finland are all included within the borders of the Reich. The Court will also note, at Page 2 of the Document itself—that is L-43—that the author envisaged the future peacetime organization of the German Air Force as comprising seven group commands, four of which lie within the borders of Germany proper at Berlin, Braunschweig, Munich, and Königsberg, but the three others are proposed to be at Vienna, Budapest, and Warsaw.

Before turning to particular acts of aggression by the German Armed Forces, I want to stress once more the basic agreement and harmony between the Nazis and the German military leaders. Without this agreement on objectives there might never have been a war. In this connection I want to direct the Tribunal’s attention to an affidavit Number 3 in Document Book I, which will be Document 3704-PS, Exhibit Number USA-536, by Von Blomberg, formerly Field Marshal, Reich War Minister, and Commander-in-Chief of the German Forces until February 1938.

I will read the affidavit into the transcript:

“From 1919, and particularly from 1924, three essential
territorial questions occupied attention in Germany. These were
the questions of the Polish Corridor, the Ruhr, and Memel.

“I, myself, as well as the whole group of German staff officers,
believed that these three questions, outstanding among which was
the question of the Polish Corridor, would have to be settled
some day, if necessary by force of arms. About 90 percent of the
German people were of the same mind as the officers on the
Polish question. A war to wipe out the outrage perpetrated by
the creation of the Polish Corridor and to lessen the threat to
separated East Prussia, surrounded by Poland and Lithuania, was
regarded as a sacred duty, though a sad necessity. This was one
of the chief reasons behind the partially secret rearmament
which began about 10 years before Hitler came to power and was
accentuated under Nazi rule.

“Before 1938-1939 the German generals were not opposed to
Hitler. There was no reason to oppose Hitler, since he produced
the results which they desired. After this time some generals
began to condemn his methods and lost confidence in the power of
his judgment. However, they failed as a group to take any
definite stand against him, although a few of them tried to do
so and as a result had to pay for this with their lives or their
positions.

“Shortly before my removal from the post of Commander-in-Chief
of the Armed Forces, in January 1938, Hitler asked me to
recommend a successor. I suggested Göring, who was the ranking
officer, but Hitler objected because of his lack of patience and
diligence. I was not replaced as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed
Forces by any officer, but Hitler personally took over my
function as Commander. Keitel was recommended by me as a _chef
de bureau_. As far as I know, he was never named Commander of
the Armed Forces but was always merely a ‘chief of staff’ under
Hitler and in effect conducted the administrative functions of
the Ministry of War.

“At my time Keitel was not opposed to Hitler and therefore was
qualified to bring about a good understanding between Hitler and
the Armed Forces, a thing which I myself desired and had
furthered as Reichswehrminister and Reichskriegsminister. To do
the opposite would have led to a civil war, for at that time the
mass of the German people supported Hitler. Many are no longer
willing to admit this. But it is the truth.

“As far as I heard, Keitel did not oppose any of Hitler’s
measures. He became a willing tool in Hitler’s hands for every
one of his decisions.

“He did not measure up to what might have been expected of him.”

The statement by Von Blomberg which I have just read is paralleled closely in some respects by an affidavit by Colonel General Blaskowitz. That is Affidavit Number 5 in Volume I of the document book Exhibit Number USA-537. Blaskowitz commanded an army in the campaign against Poland and the campaign against France. He subsequently took command of Army Group G in southern France and at the end of the war he was in command of Army Group H, which had retreated beyond the Rhine. The first three paragraphs of his affidavit are substantially identical with the first three paragraphs of Von Blomberg’s; and since they are available in all languages, for expedition I will start reading with Paragraph 4, where the affidavit is on a different subject:

“After the annexation of Czechoslovakia we hoped that the Polish
question would be settled in a peaceful fashion through
diplomatic means, since we believed that this time France and
England would come to the assistance of their ally. As a matter
of fact, we felt that if political negotiations came to nothing
the Polish question would unavoidably lead to war, that is, not
only with Poland herself but also with the Western Powers.

“When in the middle of June I received an order from the OKH to
prepare myself for an attack on Poland, I knew that this war
came even closer to the realm of possibility. This conclusion
was only strengthened by the Führer’s speech on 22 August 1939
at the Obersalzberg when it clearly seemed to be an actuality.
Between the middle of June 1939 and 1 September 1939 the members
of my staff who were engaged in preparations participated in
various discussions which went on between the OKH and the army
group. During these discussions such matters of a tactical,
strategical, and general nature were discussed as had to do with
my future position as Commander-in-Chief of the 8th Army during
the planned Polish campaign.

“During the Polish campaign, particularly during the Kutno
operations, I was repeatedly in communication with the
Commander-in-Chief of the Army; and he, as well as the Führer,
visited my headquarters. In fact, it was common practice for
commanders-in-chief of army groups and of armies to be asked
from time to time for estimates of the situation and for their
recommendations by telephone, teletype, or wireless, as well as
by personal calls. These front commanders-in-chief thus actually
became advisers to the OKH in their own field, so that the
positions shown in the attached chart embrace that group which
was the actual advisory council of the High Command of the
German Armed Forces.”

The Tribunal will note that the latter part of this affidavit, like those of Halder and Brauchitsch, vouches for the accuracy of the structure and organization of the General Staff and High Command group as described by the Prosecution. The Tribunal will also note that the Von Blomberg affidavit and the first part of the Blaskowitz affidavit make it clear beyond question that the military leaders of Germany knew of, approved, supported, and executed plans for the expansion of the Armed Forces beyond the limits set by treaties. The objectives which they had in mind are obvious, and in these documents and affidavits we see the Nazis and the generals in agreement upon the basic objective of aggrandizing Germany by force or threat of force and collaborating to build up the armed might of Germany, in order to make possible the subsequent acts of aggression. We turn now to an examination of those particular acts of aggression which have already been described to the Tribunal in general, with the particular purpose of noting participation in these criminal acts by the General Staff and High Command group.

I may say, Your Lordship, that in going over this material, in order to save time I propose to read from a very few documents. There are large numbers of documents. Accordingly, when I cite them I think there is probably no need for the Tribunal to try to find them in the documents before it. Most of them are documents already in evidence and I propose to cite them for purposes of recapitulation, without reading very much.

The Tribunal will recall that Mr. Alderman read into the transcript portions of a document, 386-PS, Exhibit Number USA-25, consisting of notes by Colonel Hossbach on a conference which was held in the German Chancellery in Berlin on the 5th of November 1937. Hitler presided at this conference, which was a small and highly secret one; and the only other participants were the four principal military leaders and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Defendant Neurath. The four chief leaders of the Armed Forces—Blomberg, who was then Reich Minister of War, and the commanders-in-chief of the three branches of the Armed Forces: Von Fritsch for the Army, Raeder for the Navy, and Göring for the Air Force—were present. Hitler embarked on a general discussion of Germany’s diplomatic and military policy and stated that the conquest of Austria and Czechoslovakia was an essential preliminary “for the improvement of our military and political position” and “in order to remove any threat from the flanks.”

The military and political advantages which were envisaged included the acquisition of a new source of food, shorter and better frontiers, the release of troops for other tasks, and the possibility of forming new divisions from the population of the conquered territories. Blomberg and Von Fritsch joined in the discussion and Von Fritsch stated that he was making a study to investigate “the possibilities of carrying out operations against Czechoslovakia with special consideration for the conquest of the Czechoslovakian system of fortifications.”

The following spring, in March 1938, the German plans with respect to Austria came to fruition. Mr. Alderman has already read into the record portions of the diary kept by the Defendant Jodl. The portion here in question, Document 1780-PS, Exhibit Number USA-72, of this diary shows the participation of the German military leaders in the absorption of Austria. As is shown by Jodl’s diary entry for 11 February 1938, the Defendant Keitel and two other important generals were present at the Obersalzberg meeting between Schuschnigg and Hitler, and the purpose is shown clearly by the entry which recites that:

“. . . in the evening and on 12 February General Keitel with
General Von Reichenau and Sperrle at the Obersalzberg,
Schuschnigg together with G. Schmidt are again being put under
heaviest political and military pressure. At 2300 hours
Schuschnigg signs protocol.”

The General Von Reichenau referred to there was at that time the head commander of Wehrkreis 7, one of the military districts into which Germany was divided. He subsequently commanded the 10th Army in Poland and the 6th Army in France and was a member of the group as defined in the Indictment. Sperrle, who was in Spain during the civil war and then commanded Luftflotte 3, the 3rd German Air Fleet, practically throughout the war, was also a member of the group. Two days later Keitel and other military leaders were preparing proposals to be submitted to Hitler which would give the Austrian Government the impression that Germany would resort to force unless the Schuschnigg agreement was ratified in Vienna.

These proposals are embodied in a document dated February 14, 1938, 1775-PS, Exhibit Number USA-73, and signed by Keitel. Portions of Keitel’s proposals to the Führer are as follows:

“1) Take no real preparatory measures in the Army or Luftwaffe.
No troop movements or redeployments.

“2) Spread false but quite credible news which may lead to the
conclusion of military preparations against Austria: a) through
V-men”—that means agents—“in Austria, b) through our customs
personnel at the frontier, c) through travelling agents.”

Going down the document to 4), Keitel proposed:

“4) Order a very active make-believe wireless exchange in
Wehrkreis VII and between Berlin and Munich.

“5) Real maneuvers, training flights, and winter maneuvers of
the mountain troops near the frontier.

“6) Admiral Canaris has to be ready beginning on February 14 in
the Service Command Headquarters VII in order to carry out
measures given by order of the Chief of the OKW.”

As Jodl’s diary shows under the entry for 14 February, these deceptive maneuvers were very effective and created in Austria the impression that these threats of force might be expected to create. About a month later armed intervention was precipitated by Schuschnigg’s decision to hold a plebiscite in Austria. Hitler ordered mobilization in accordance with the pre-existing plans for the invasion of Austria, these plans being known as “Case Otto,” in order to absorb Austria and stop the plebiscite. Jodl’s diary under the entry for 10 March 1938 tells us as follows on Page 2:

“By surprise and without consulting his ministers Schuschnigg
ordered a plebiscite for Sunday, 13 March, which should bring a
strong majority for the Legitimists in the absence of plan or
preparation.

“Führer is determined not to tolerate it. The same night, March
9 to 10, he calls for Göring. General Von Reichenau is called
back from Cairo Olympic Committee, General Von Schober is
ordered to come, as well as Minister Glaise-Horstenau, who is
with Gauleiter Bürckel in the Palatinate.”

The General Von Schober referred to succeeded General Von Reichenau as Commander of Wehrkreis 7 and later was Commander of the 11th Army in Russia and was a member of the group as defined in the Indictment.

The invasion of Austria differs from the other German acts of aggression in that the invasion was not closely scheduled and timed in advance. This is the case simply because the invasion was precipitated by an outside event, that being Schuschnigg’s order for the plebiscite. But, although for this reason the element of deliberately timed planning was lacking, the foregoing documents make clear the participation of the military leaders at all stages.

At the small policy meeting of November 1937, when Hitler’s general program for Austria and Czechoslovakia was outlined, the only others present were the four principal military leaders and the Foreign Secretary.

In February Keitel, Reichenau, and Sperrle were all present to help subject Schuschnigg to the heaviest military pressure. Keitel and others immediately thereafter worked out and executed a program of military threat and deception to frighten the Austrian Government into acceptance of the Schuschnigg protocol. When the actual invasion took place, it was, of course, directed by the military leaders and executed by the Armed Forces, and we are indebted to the Defendant Jodl for a clear statement of why the German military leaders were only too delighted to join with the Nazis in bringing about the end of Austrian independence.

In his lecture in November 1943 to the Gauleiter, which appears in Document L-172, which is Exhibit Number USA-34, Jodl explained—this is Page 5, Paragraph 3 of the translation:

“The Austrian Anschluss, in its turn, brought with it not only
fulfillment of an old national aim, but also had the effect both
of re-inforcing our fighting strength and of materially
improving our strategic position. Whereas until then the
territory of Czechoslovakia had projected in a most menacing way
right into Germany (a wasp waist in the direction of France and
air base for the Allies, in particular Russia) Czechoslovakia
herself was now enclosed by pincers. Her own strategic position
had now become so unfavorable that she was bound to fall a
victim to any vigorous attack before effective aid from the West
could be expected to arrive.”

The foregoing extract from Jodl’s speech makes a good transition to the case of Czechoslovakia—“Case Green,” or “Fall Grün.” I propose to treat this very briefly. Mr. Alderman has covered the general story of German aggression against Czechoslovakia very fully and the documents he read from are full of evidence showing the knowing participation in this venture by Keitel, Jodl, and other members of the group.

Once again the Hossbach minutes of the conference between Hitler and the four principal military leaders, Document 386-PS, Exhibit Number USA-25, may be called to mind. Austria and Czechoslovakia were then listed as the most proximate victims of German aggression. After the absorption of Austria, Hitler as head of the State and Keitel as Chief of all the Armed Forces lost no time in turning their attention to Czechoslovakia. From this point on nearly the whole story is contained in the Schmundt file, Document 388-PS, Exhibit Number USA-26, and Jodl’s diary, both of which have been read from extensively. These two sources of information go far, I think, to demolish what is urged in defense of the military defendants and the General Staff and High Command group. They seek to create the impression that the German generals were pure military technicians, that they were not interested in or not informed about political and diplomatic considerations—that they prepared plans for military attack or defense on a purely hypothetical basis. They say all this in order to suggest that they did not share and could not estimate Hitler’s aggressive intentions, that they carried out politically conceived orders like military automatons, with no idea whether the wars they launched were aggressive or not.

When these arguments are made, Your Honor, may I respectfully suggest: Read the Schmundt file and read General Jodl’s diary. They make it abundantly clear that aggressive designs were conceived jointly between the Nazis and the generals, that the military leaders were fully posted on the aggressive intentions and fully informed on the political and diplomatic developments, that, indeed, German generals had a strange habit of turning up at diplomatic foregatherings; and indeed, if the documents did not show these things, a moment’s thought must show them to be true.

A highly successful program of conquest depends on armed might. It cannot be executed by an unprepared, weak, or recalcitrant military leadership. It has, of course, been said that war is too important a business to be left to soldiers alone; and this is no doubt true, but it is equally true that an aggressive diplomacy is far too dangerous a business to be conducted without military advice and support, and no doubt some of the German generals had qualms about Hitler’s timing and the boldness of some of his moves. Some of these doubts are rather interestingly reflected in an entry from Jodl’s diary which has not yet been read.

That is Document 1780-PS again—the entry for 10 August 1938. It appears on Page 4 of the translation of 1780-PS:

“10 August 1938. The Army chiefs and the chiefs of the Air
Forces groups, Lieutenant Colonel Jeschonnek, and I are ordered
to the Berghof. After dinner the Führer makes a speech lasting
for almost 3 hours, in which he develops his political thoughts.
The subsequent attempts to draw the Führer’s attention to the
defects of our preparations, which are undertaken by a few
generals of the Army, are rather unfortunate. This applies
especially to the remarks of General Von Wietersheim, in which,
to top it off, he claims to quote from General Adams that the
Western fortifications can be held for only 3 weeks. The Führer
becomes very indignant and flares up, bursting into the remarks
that in such a case the whole Army would not be good for
anything. ‘I assure you, General, the position will be held not
only for 3 weeks, but for 3 years.’

“The cause of this despondent opinion, which unfortunately
enough is held widely within the Army General Staff, is based on
various reasons. First of all, it”—the General Staff—“is
prejudiced by old memories and feels responsible also for
political decisions instead of obeying and executing its
military mission. That is certainly done with traditional
devotion, but the vigor of the soul is lacking, because in the
end they do not believe in the genius of the Führer. One does
perhaps compare him with Charles XII. And since water flows
downhill, this defeatism may not only possibly cause immense
political damage, for the opposition between the generals’
opinion and that of the Führer is common talk, but may also
constitute a danger for the morale of the troops. But I have no
doubt that this, as well as the morale of the people, will
encourage the Führer enormously when the right moment comes.”

THE PRESIDENT: Shall we break off now for 10 minutes?

[_A recess was taken._]

COL. TAYLOR: The extract from the Jodl diary from which I have just read may indeed show that some of the German generals at that time were cautious with respect to Germany’s ability to take on Poland and the Western Powers simultaneously; but, nonetheless, the entry shows no lack of sympathy with the Nazi aims for conquest. And there is no evidence in Jodl’s diary or elsewhere that any substantial number of German generals lacked sympathy with Hitler’s objectives. Furthermore, the top military leaders always joined with and supported his decisions, with formidable success in these years from 1938 to 1942.

So, if we are told that German military leaders did not know that German policy toward Czechoslovakia was aggressive or based on force or threat of force, let us remember that on 30 May 1938 Hitler signed a most secret directive to Keitel—already in the transcript, Document 388-PS, Exhibit Number USA-26—in which he stated clearly his unalterable decision to smash Czechoslovakia by military action in the near future.

The Defendant Jodl was in no doubt what that directive meant. He noted in his diary, the same day, that the Führer had stated his final decision to destroy Czechoslovakia soon and had initiated military preparation all along the line.

And the succeeding evidence, both in the Schmundt file and in the Jodl diary, shows how these military preparations went forward. Numerous examples of discussions, plans, and preparations during the last few weeks before the Munich Pact, including discussions with Hungary and the Hungarian General Staff, in which General Halder participated, are contained in the Jodl diary and the later items in the Schmundt file. The day the Munich Pact was signed, the 29th of September, Jodl noted in his diary—Document 1780-PS—the entry for 29 September:

“The Munich Pact is signed, Czechoslovakia as a power is out.
Four zones as set forth will be occupied between the 2d and 7th
of October. The remaining part of mainly German character will
be occupied by the 10th of October. The genius of the Führer and
his determination not to shun even a world war have again won
the victory without the use of force. The hope remains that the
incredulous, the weak, and the doubtful people have been
converted and will remain that way.”

Plans for the liquidation of the remainder of Czechoslovakia were made soon after Munich. Ultimately the absorption of the remainder was accomplished by diplomatic bullying, in which the Defendant Keitel participated, for the usual purpose of demonstrating that German armed might was ready to enforce the threats—as shown by two documents already in, and which I need not read: Document 2802-PS, Exhibit Number USA-117; and 2798-PS, Exhibit Number USA-118.

And once again the Defendant Jodl, in his 1943 lecture, Document L-172, Exhibit Number USA-34, tells us clearly and in one sentence why the objective of eliminating Czechoslovakia lay as close to the hearts of the German military leaders as to the hearts of the Nazi:

“The bloodless solution of the Czech conflict in the autumn of
1938 and the spring of 1939 and the annexation of Slovakia
rounded off the territory of Greater Germany in such a way that
it then became possible to consider the Polish problem on the
basis of more or less favorable strategic premises.”

And this serves to recall the affidavits by Blomberg and Blaskowitz, from which I have already read. The whole group of German staff and front officers believed that the question of the Polish Corridor “would have to be settled some day, if necessary by force of arms,” they told us. “Hitler produced the results which all of us warmly desired,” they have told us.

I turn now to Poland. The German attack on Poland is a particularly interesting one from the standpoint of the General Staff and High Command. The documents which show the aggressive nature of the attack have already been introduced by Colonel Griffith-Jones of the British Delegation. I propose to approach it from a slightly different angle, inasmuch as these documents serve as an excellent case study of the functioning of the General Staff and High Command group as defined in the Indictment.

This attack was carefully timed and planned, and in the documents one can observe the staff work step by step. Colonel Griffith-Jones read from a series of directives from Hitler and Keitel, embodied in Document C-120, Exhibit Number GB-1, involving “Fall Weiss”, which was the code word for the plan of attack on Poland. That is a whole series of documents, and the series starts—C-120—with a reissuance of a document called, “Directive for the Uniform Preparation for War by the Armed Forces.”

We have encountered this periodically reissued directive previously. That was a sort of form for standing instructions to the Armed Forces laying out what their tasks during the coming period would be.

In essence these directives are: Firstly, statements of what the Armed Forces must be prepared to accomplish in view of political and diplomatic policies and developments and; secondly, indications of what should be accomplished diplomatically in order to make the military tasks easier and the chances of success greater. They constitute, in fact, a fusion of diplomatic and military thought and they strongly demonstrate the mutual interdependence of aggressive diplomacy and military planning.

Note the limited distribution of these documents, early in April 1939, in which the preparation of the plans for the Polish war is ordered. Five copies only are distributed by Keitel: One goes to Brauchitsch at OKH; one to Raeder at OKM; one to Göring at OKL; and two to Warlimont in the planning branch of OKW.

Hitler lays down that the plans must be capable of execution by 1 September 1939; and, as we all remember, that target date was adhered to. The fusion of military and diplomatic thought is clearly brought out by a part of one of these documents which has not previously been read; that is Document C-120, Subdivision D, and it is to be found at Page 4. The sub-heading is “Political Requirements and Aims”:

“German relations with Poland continue to be based on the
principle of avoiding any quarrels. Should Poland, however,
change her policy towards Germany, based up to now on the same
principles as our own, and adopt a threatening attitude towards
Germany, a final settlement might become necessary,
notwithstanding the pact in effect with Poland.

“The aim, then, will be to destroy Polish military strength and
create in the East a situation which satisfies the requirements
of national defense. The Free State of Danzig will be proclaimed
a part of the Reich territory at the outbreak of the conflict,
at the latest.

“The political leadership considers it its task in this case to
isolate Poland if possible, that is to say, to limit the war to
Poland only.

“The development of increasing internal crises in France and the
resulting British cautiousness might produce such a situation in
the not too distant future.

“Intervention by Russia, so far as she would be able to do this,
cannot be expected to be of any use for Poland, because this
would imply Poland’s destruction by Bolshevism.

“The attitude of the Baltic States will be determined wholly by
German military exigencies.

“On the German side Hungary cannot be considered a certain ally.
Italy’s attitude is determined by the Berlin-Rome Axis.”

Sub-heading 2, “Military Conclusions”:

“The great objectives in the building up of the German Armed
Forces will continue to be determined by the antagonism of the
Western Democracies. Fall Weiss constitutes only a precautionary
complement to these preparations. It is not to be looked upon in
any way, however, as the necessary prerequisite for a military
settlement with the Western opponents.

“The isolation of Poland will be more easily maintained, even
after the beginning of operations, if we succeed in starting the
war with heavy, sudden blows and in gaining rapid successes.

“The entire situation will require, however, that precautions be
taken to safeguard the western boundary and the German North Sea
coast, as well as the air over them.”

Let no one suggest that these are hypothetical plans or that the General Staff and High Command group did not know what was in prospect. The plans show on their face that they are no war game. But, to clinch this point, let us refer briefly to Mr. Alderman’s so-called “pin-up” document on Poland, Document L-79, Exhibit Number USA-27. These are Schmundt’s notes on the conference in Hitler’s study at the Reich Chancellery, Berlin, on 23 May 1939, when Hitler announced—and I quote just one sentence:

“There is, therefore, no question of sparing Poland, and we are
left with the decision to attack Poland at the first suitable
opportunity.”

Note who was present besides Hitler and a few military aides: The Defendant Göring, Commander-in-Chief of the Luftwaffe; the Defendant Raeder, Navy; the Defendant Keitel, OKW; Von Brauchitsch, Commander-in-Chief of the Army; Colonel General Milch, who was State Secretary of the Air Ministry and Inspector General of the Luftwaffe; General Bodenschatz, Göring’s personal assistant; Rear Admiral Schniewind, Chief of the naval war staff; Colonel Jeschonnek, Chief of the Air Staff; Colonel Warlimont, Planning Staff. All of them, except Milch, Bodenschatz, and the adjutants, are members of the group.

So far these documents have shown us the initial and general planning of the attack on Poland. These general plans, however, had to be checked, corrected, and perfected by the field commanders who were to carry out the attack.

I offer Document C-142, which will be Exhibit Number USA-538. This document was issued in the middle of June 1939, and in this document Von Brauchitsch, as Commander-in-Chief of the Army, passed on the general outlines of the plan for the attack on Poland to the field commanders-in-chief—to the Oberbefehlshaber of army groups and armies—so that the field commanders could work out the actual preparation and deployment of troops in accordance with the plans. This is from Page 1 of the translation, and I quote:

“The object of the operation is to destroy the Polish Armed
Forces. High policy demands that the war should be begun by
heavy surprise blows in order to achieve quick results. The
intention of the Commander-in-Chief of the Army is to prevent a
regular mobilization and concentration of the Polish Army by a
surprise invasion of Polish territory and to destroy . . . the
mass of the Polish Army which is to be expected to be west of
the Vistula-Narev Line.”

I skip to the next paragraph:

“The army group commands and the army commands will make their
preparations on the basis of surprise of the enemy. There will
be alterations necessary if surprise should have to be
abandoned. These will have to be developed simply and quickly on
the same basis; they are to be prepared mentally to such an
extent that in case of an order from the Commander-in-Chief of
the Army they can be carried out quickly.”

THE PRESIDENT: What is the date of that document?

COL. TAYLOR: The date of that document is the middle of June 1939; I believe it is the 15th or 14th of June 1939. The date is on the original.

The next document is 2327-PS, which will be Exhibit Number USA-539. It is signed by Blaskowitz. It is dated 14 June 1939, and it shows us an Oberbefehlshaber at work in the field planning an attack. Blaskowitz at that time was Commander of the 3rd Army Group and he became Commander-in-Chief of the German 8th Army during the Polish campaign. I read some extracts from this document found on Page 1 of the translation:

“The Commander-in-Chief of the Army has ordered the working out
of a plan of deployment against Poland which takes into account
the demands of the political leadership for the opening of war
by surprise and for quick success.

“The order of deployment by the High Command of the Army, known
as Fall Weiss, authorizes the 3rd Army Group (in Fall Weiss 8th
Army headquarters) to give necessary directions and orders to
all commands subordinated to it for Fall Weiss.”

I skip to Paragraph 7 on Page 1:

“The whole correspondence on Fall Weiss has to be conducted
under the classification ‘top secret.’ This is to be disregarded
only if the content of a document, in the judgment of the chief
of the responsible command, is harmless in every way—even in
connection with other documents.

“For the middle of July a conference is planned where details of
the execution will be discussed. Time and place will be ordered
later on. Special requests are to be communicated to 3rd Army
Group before 10 July.”

That is signed, “The Commander-in-Chief of the 3rd Army Group, F. Blaskowitz.”

I skip to Page 2 to read one further extract under the title at the top of Page 2 of the translation, “Aims of Operation Fall Weiss”:

“The operation, in order to forestall an orderly Polish
mobilization, is to be opened by surprise with forces which are
for the most part armored and motorized, placed on alert in the
neighborhood of the border. The initial superiority over the
Polish frontier guards and surprise, both of which can be
expected with certainty, are to be maintained by quickly
bringing up other parts of the Army as well as by counteracting
the marching up of the Polish Army.