dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, we will go on then to Conference Number 23 of the Central Planning Board, held the 3rd of November 1942. It is the English translation, Page 27. The German text is on Page 1024, in which it appears that you were present at and participated in the discussion, and I can your attention to Page 1024, Line 10, to these entries of the stenographic minutes: "Speer: Well, under the pretext of industry we could deceive the French into believing that we would release all prisoners of war who are rollers and smelters if they give us the names. "Rohland: We have installed our own office in Paris. I see, you mean the French should give the names of the smelters who are prisoners of war in Germany? "Milch: I would simply say, you get two men in exchange for one. "Speer: The French firms know exactly which prisoners of war are smelters. Unofficially, you should create the impression that they would be released. They give us the names and then we get them out. Have a try. "Rohland: That is an idea." Now, your contribution was to want two men in place of one; is that right?
MILCH: Yes; that is to say, two people from another trade for one of these particular skilled workers. In what straits we were, you can see from...
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: That was your entire objective?
MILCH: The entire purpose was to get these people and to give them others in exchange.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, let us take up Conference Number 53 of the Planning Board, held the 16th of February 1944; English translation, Page 26, and the German from Page 1851 on. You will find yourself included among those who were present and it was at the Reich Air Ministry that it was held. I first call your attention to the entry on Page 1863, the words opposite "Milch": "The armament industry employs foreign workers in, large numbers; according to the latest figures, 40%. The latest allocations from the Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor are mostly foreigners and we had to give up manyGerman workers in the recruitment drive. Particularly the aircraft industry, which is a young industry, employs a great many young men who should be called up. This will, however, be very difficult, as those working for experimental stations cannot be touched. In mass production, the foreign workers preponderate and in some instances represent 95 percent and even more; 88 percent of the workers engaged in the production of our newest engines are Russian prisoners of war and the 12 percent are German men and women. On the Ju-52, which are now regarded as transport planes only, and the monthly production of which is from 50 to 60 machines, only six to eight German workers are engaged; the rest are Ukrainian women who have lowered the record of production of skilled workers." Do you recall that?
MILCH: Yes, I can remember that distinctly.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And on Page 1873, you come forward with this suggestion: "Milch: The list of slackers should be handed to Himmler. He will make them work all right. This is of a great general educational importance, and has also a deterrent effect on others who would also like to shirk."
MILCH: Yes, this applies again to the slackers in agriculture as I mentioned this morning.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Among foreign workers, was it not?
MILCH: No; these were Englishmen, the slackers.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Englishmen are foreigners in Germany, are they not? I do not know what you mean, they were not foreigners. They were Englishmen.
MILCH: Englishmen never worked for us. So they cannot have been Englishmen.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: What were they? You say they were all German.
MILCH: What we understood as slackers were those people who were compelled to work during the war, Germans who normally were not regular workers, but were forcibly made to work during the war.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: We will get to that in a minute. First, I want to ask you how Himmler was going to make them work. What did Himmler do, what methods did Himmler use? Why were you making proposals to Himmler in this matter?
MILCH: Because Himmler at a meeting had stated that as regards supplementary rations -- the worker in Germany had the same basic rations as the rest of the population, and apart from this he received quite considerable additions which in the case of those doing the heaviest work were several times the normal basic rations. The general routine was that these rations were issued by food offices, irrespective of where and how the individual was working. The suggestion was made by Himmler that these additions should be made dependent upon the output of the workers. This was possible in the case of those workers who came from concentration camps, et cetera , and were under Himmler. This procedure could not be applied to free workers; hence the proposal to bring to reason those who sabotaged work in their own country, by issuing additional I rations, as laid down for their type of work, only in proportion to their output.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You know the difference between labor camps and concentration camps, do you not?
MILCH: Yes, of course.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And these people who were doing work in these industries were kept mainly in the work camps, were they not, in which their rations were controlled without Himmler's hands being in it at all?
MILCH: No; the German workers were not kept in labor camps but they lived at home and, therefore, received their additional rations from the local food offices. I want to stress again that it was the German workers themselves who asked that measures be taken -- the factory foremen, who were infuriated to see that people who did not do anything, who let their country down in times of stress, received more rations than ordinary civilians.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You still say that all you are talking about were German and never foreign workers. Now, be clear about that.
MILCH: By slackers I meant German workers; in my opinion, only these were in question.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I ask that your attention be called to Page 1913: This is your contribution at that point: "Milch: It is therefore quite impossible to utilize every foreigner fully unless we make them do piecework and are in a position to take measures against foreigners who are not doing their bit." Do you find that entry?
MILCH: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And then you proceed to complain that: "If a foreman lays his hands on a prisoner of war and boxes his ears, there is at once a terrible row; the man is put in prison, and so on. There are many officials in Germany who consider it their first duty to stand up for other men's human rights instead of looking after war production. I, too, am for human rights, but if a Frenchman says, 'You fellows will be hanged and the works manager will be the first to have his head cut off and then if the boss says, 'I'll give him one for that,' then he is in for it. Nobody sides with the manager, but only with the 'poor devil' who said that to him." Did you report that to the meeting?
MILCH: That may well be the case.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: What did you suggest?
MILCH: I can remember cases where foreign workers threatened and even assaulted their German foreman, and when he defended himself action was taken against him. I did not think it right.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, you provided your own remedy, did you not? In the next line you say: "I told my engineers, 'If you do not hit a man like this, then I shall punish you. The more you do in this respect, the more I shall think of you; I shall see to it that nothing happens to you.' This has not yet gone round. I cannot talk to every works manager individually. But I should like to see some one try to stop me, as I can deal with anyone who tries it." Do you find that?
MILCH: I cannot remember the exact words but I stick to the point that it was an impossible situation for a prisoner or foreign worker to be able to say to his German foreman, "We will cut your throat," and the foreman...
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, do you mean to say that if a prisoner of war attempted or threatened to cut his employer's throat, that German officers would stand up for him as against the employer? You do not mean that, do you? [There was no response.]
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, we will go on: "If the small works manager" -- I am still quoting from you -- "does that, he is put into a concentration camp..." Do you find that?
MILCH: Yes, I see it here.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: ". . and runs the risk of having his prisoners of war taken from him." Now, I am still quoting you and I want you to find the entry. "In one case, two Russian officers took off with an airplane but crashed. I ordered that these two men be hanged at once. They were hanged or shot yesterday. I left that to the SS. I wanted them to be hanged in the factory for the others to see." Do you find that?
MILCH: I have found it, and I can only say I have never had anybody hanged nor have I even given such an order. I could not possibly have said such a thing. I had nothing to do with this question. Neither do I know of any instance where two Russian officers tried to escape by plane.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Is there anything else you would like to say with reference to that entry?
MILCH: No. I have nothing to say. I do not know anything about it and I also do not believe I ever said it.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: That is all that I have at the present time.
MR. G. D. ROBERTS (Leading Counsel for the United Kingdom): Witness, I have some questions on behalf of the British Delegation. My first point is this: You said on Friday that, beginning in 1935, an air force was built up in Germany for defensive purposes. Do you remember that?
MILCH: Yes; 1935.
MR. ROBERTS: And do you say that it remained on a defensive basis up to December 1939?
MILCH: Yes.
MR. ROBERTS: You do. I want you to listen to three pieces of evidence -- speeches made by your chief, the Defendant Goering. I am quoting from the shorthand notes of the 8th of January, in the afternoon, on Page 2306. In May 1935, Goering said: "I intend to create a Luftwaffe which, if the hour should strike, will burst upon the foe like an avenging host. The enemy must feel that he has lost even before he has started fighting." Does that sound like a defensive air force?
MILCH: No, that does not sound like it; but one has to distinguish between words and deeds.
MR. ROBERTS: I shall come to the deeds in a moment. [Laughter.]
THE PRESIDENT: If there is any more of this laughter, the Court will have to be cleared.
MR. ROBERTS: On the 8th of July 1938 Goering, addressing a number of German aircraft manufacturers, said: "War with Czechoslovakia is imminent; the German Air Force is already superior to the English Air Force. If Germany wins the war, she will be the greatest power in the world; she will dominate the world markets, and Germany will be a rich nation. To attain this goal risks must be taken." Does that sound like a defensive German Air Force? Does it?
MILCH: No, that certainly does not sound like it. I should like to be allowed to say something to that, when you have finished.
MR. ROBERTS: Please limit yourself, if you can, in the interest of time, to answering my question, which is very short. Now may I read you one further piece of evidence; the speech made by Goering on 14 October 1938, that is less than a month after the Munich Pact. "Hitler has ordered me to organize a gigantic armament program, which would make all previous achievements appear insignificant. I have been ordered to build as rapidly as possible an air force five times as large as the present one." Does that sound like an air force for defensive purposes?
MILCH: This air force would have taken many years to build.
MR. ROBERTS: I suggest to you that your evidence on that point was grossly incorrect. I now want to come to my second point. You were, present at the conference of chiefs of the services in the Chancellery on 23 May 1939?
MILCH: What was the date please?
MR. ROBERTS: I would like you to see the document, which is L-79. You did see it on Friday, I think.
MILCH: On 23 May, was it not?
MR. ROBERTS: Yes, that is right. I just want to remind you who else was present. There were the Fuehrer, Goering, Raeder, Von Brauchitsch, Keitel , yourself, Halder, General Bodenschatz, Warlimont -- was Warlimont the deputy for Jodl?
MILCH: I cannot say for whom he was there.
MR. ROBERTS: Very well -- and others; I will not mention the names. Now, Witness, those were leaders of the German Armed Forces?
MILCH: May I say, as far as I can remember Field Marshal Goering was not present. I cannot remember.
MR. ROBERTS: He is down there as being present. You think he was not there?
MILCH: Yes. I cannot remember, but, to my recollection I was sent there at the last moment to represent him.
MR. ROBERTS: Well, then, apart from Goering, if he was not there, those were mostly the leaders of the German forces, is that right? MILCH, Yes. It was the Commander-in-Chief of the Army and the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy, and the OKW, yes.
MR. ROBERTS: Would you describe them, from your knowledge of them, as men of honor?
MILCH: Yes.
MR. ROBERTS: Is it one of the qualities of a man of honor that he keeps his word?
MILCH: Yes.
MR. ROBERTS: You knew, of course, did you not, that Germany had pledged her word to respect the neutrality of Belgium, of the Netherlands, and Luxembourg?
MILCH: I suppose so, but I did not know the various agreements.
MR. ROBERTS: Did you not know that less than a month before that meeting, namely on the 28th of April, Hitler in the Reichstag gave an assurance of his respect for the neutrality of a large number of countries, European countries, including the three I have mentioned? Did you not know that as a matter of history?
MILCH: I suppose so, yes.
MR. ROBERTS: We have seen the film, you know, in this Court, of that very occurrence with the Defendant Goering presiding as President of the Reichstag while that assurance was given.
MIILCH: I have not seen the film. I do not know the film.
MR. ROBERTS: Yes. It is a German newsreel. Do you remember that at that conference Hitler said these words, which are well known to the Tribunal: "The Dutch and Belgian air bases must be occupied by the Armed Forces. Declarations of neutrality must be ignored.... An effort must be made to deal the enemy a heavy or decisive final blow right at the start. Considerations of right or wrong, or treaties, do not enter into the matter." Do you remember those words being said?
MILCH: I cannot remember exactly what the words were. I know that it was a question of the Polish Corridor and Danzig, that in this connection Hitler explained what complications might follow in the West, and what he intended to do about it; but what he said in detail I can no longer remember.
MR. ROBERTS: Was any protest made by any of these honorable men at the breach of Germany's pledged word?
MILCH: During this meeting it was impossible for anyone present to speak at all. Hitler addressed us from his desk, and after the speech he left the room. A discussion did not take place; he did not allow it.
MR. ROBERTS: You say it is impossible for an honorable man to protect his honor, Witness?
MILCH: I cannot remember Hitler's actual words shown here.
MR. ROBERTS: Can you give the Tribunal your opinion of it?
MILCH: At this meeting I did not have the impression that Hitler said anything contrary to the obligations entered into. That I cannot remember.
MR. ROBERTS: Are you now saying that those minutes are wrong?
MILCH: No, I cannot say that either. I can only say I have no recollection of the exact words used. Whether the minutes are completely correct I do not know either. As far as I know they were recorded subsequently by one of the adjutants present.
MR. ROBERTS: Because we know that is exactly what Germany did 12 months after, when she broke her pledged word to Belgium, to the Netherlands, and Luxembourg, and brought misery and death to millions. You know that now, do you not?
MILCH: That I know, yes; but as soldiers we had nothing to do with the political side. We were not asked about that.
MR. ROBERTS: Do you call the honoring of...
DR. RUDOLPH DIX (Counsel for the Defendant Schacht ): I do not speak now for the Defendant Schacht, but for the entire Defense. I ask the Tribunal that the witness be questioned about facts, and not about his opinion as to moral standards.
THE PRESIDENT: He is being asked about facts.
MR. ROBERTS: You have just said that you know now -- we know, that 12 months later Germany did violate the neutrality of Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg.
MILCH: But we do not know what the reasons were for this, and what other obligations these countries might have entered into. It was not a job of the soldiers to judge this.
MR. ROBERTS: Was it not a job of the soldier to object if he was asked to break his country's word?
MILCH: I fully agree with you, if a soldier breaks his word in matters which are his province and where he has a say as a soldier. As regards matters quite outside his province, which he cannot judge and about which he knows nothing, he cannot be made responsible and called to account.
MR. ROBERTS: You can only speak for your own knowledge. Are you saying that you did not know that your country was pledged to observe the neutrality of these three small countries?
MILCH: That I have read in the Reichstag speech. But I did not know how the other side had reacted to that promise. It was not known to me, and it could easily be that the other side did not at all want this protection, or this promise, or this guarantee. The soldier could not judge this at all; only the political authorities could know this.
MR. ROBERTS: Well, we perhaps will have to ask that of the soldiers in the High Command, who are now in the dock, when they get in the witness box. But I put it to you it must have been common knowledge in Germany that Hitler was giving guarantees and assurances to all these smaller countries?
MILCH: Hitler proposed and offered many things. He offered limitations of armaments for all countries; he offered not to use bombers; but in these cases also his proposals were not accepted. Therefore the political authorities alone could know what they should and could demand from their soldiers. The only duty of a soldier is to obey.
MR. ROBERTS: Will you please answer my question. That was not an answer at all to my question. We know the facts now, Witness, from the documents, from your own German documents. I want to test your knowledge and your ideas of honor. Did you not think it grossly dishonorable to give a pledge on 28 April, and to make secret resolution to break it on 23 May?
MILCH: You are right if the situation had not changed in any way, and that I cannot judge.
MR. ROBERTS: You must have your own code of honor, even though you are in the service. You know, of course, that the neutrality of Norway was violated?
MILCH: Yes, according to our knowledge and in our opinion it was violated twice.
MR. ROBERTS: Do you know that on the 12th and 13th of March 1940 Jodl was putting in his diary, "The Fuehrer is still looking for a pretext" to give out to the world for an invasion of Norway? Do you know that?
MIELCH: I do not know this diary and this entry.
MR. ROBERTS: You took an active part in the invasion of Norway, did you not?
MILCH: A few days after the invasion started I was in command of the air force up there for a short time.
MR. ROBERTS: You had actually a command in Norway?
MIELCH: Yes.
DR. JAHRREISS: I think it necessary to clear up a point which apparently concerns a misunderstanding by the interpreter. I have just heard that a diary entry by the Defendant Jodl has been wrongly translated back into German. The German text says "nach einer Begrundung," that is "for a justification." I also believe the word "justification" is in the English translation. It should not have been interpreted as "Ausrede," that would be "pretexte" in French and that is something quite different.
MR. ROBERTS: Whatever it reads in the translation, Witness, would you agree that according to the entry in the diary, the Fuehrer was still looking for it, whether it was a reason or an excuse? Now I want to ask you only one more question on this side of he case. You know that Belgrade was bombed in, I think, April 1941?
MILCH: I heard about that from the Army report at the time.
MR. ROBERTS: Without any declaration of war, or any warning to the civilian population at all, you heard that?
MILCH: That I do not know, no.
MR. ROBERTS: Did you not discuss it with Goering?
MILCH: The attack on Belgrade? No; I cannot remember.
MR. ROBERTS: Did not even he express regret, shall we say, regarding the large-scale bombing of a large capital without even one hour warning to the civilian population?
MILCH: I do not know. I cannot remember any such conversation.
MR. ROBERTS: That is murder, is it not? [There was no response.]
MR. ROBERTS: Perhaps you would rather not answer that question?
MILCH: I cannot answer "yes" or "no," because I know nothing of the circumstances of the attack. I do not know whether war had been declared; I do not know whether a warning had been given. Neither do I know whether Belgrade was a fortress, nor which targets were attacked in Belgrade. I know of so many bombing attacks about which the same questions could be asked in the same manner.
MR. ROBERTS: I asked the question, Witness, because we had the use of the document in front of us, and knew that it was Hitler's order that Belgrade was to be suddenly destroyed by waves of bombers, without any ultimatum, or any diplomatic arguments, or negotiations at all. Would I put that question if I had not known of the document? Let me turn to something else.
MILCH: May I say I have heard of this document only today because you quoted it.
MR. ROBERTS: I want to put to you now an incident with regard to the Camp Stalag Luft III at Sagan. Do you know about what I am talking?
MILCH: Yes, I know about that now.
MR. ROBERTS: Do you know that on 24 and 25 March 1944 about 80 air force officers, British and Dominion, with some others, escaped from the Stalag Luft III Camp?
MILCH: I know about this from the British interrogation camp in which I was kept, where the whole case was posted up on the wall.
MR. ROBERTS: We will come to that in a moment. Do you know that of those 80, 50 were shot?
MIELCH: Yes.
MR. ROBERTS: In various parts of Germany and the occupied countries from Danzig to Saarbrucken; you have heard of that?
MILCH: I heard that about 50 were shot, but did not know where.
MR. ROBERTS: Have you heard that quite unusually the bodies were never seen again, but that urns said to contain their ashes were brought back to the camp; you heard of that?
MILCH: I heard of it in the camp, where I was kept, from Mr. Anthony Eden's speech in the House of Commons.
MR. ROBERTS: You heard that although these officers were reported by your Government as having been shot while offering resistance or trying to escape, yet not one was wounded, and all 50 were shot dead.
MILCH: At first I heard only the official report in Germany, that these officers had been shot while resisting or trying to escape. We did not believe this version and there was a lot of discussion about this without precise knowledge. We were afraid that these men might have been murdered.
MR. ROBERTS: You were afraid that murder had been committed. It does appear likely, does it not?
MILCH: We got that impression, as the various details we heard could not be pieced together.
MR. ROBERTS: It is quite clear that if that was murder, the order for that murder would have to come from a high level, is it not?
MILCH: Certainly. I heard further details about this from the Inspector General for Prisoners of War, General Westhoff, while both of us were in captivity in England.
MR. ROBERTS: Now, I want to ask you, first of all, about the Prisoner-of-War Organization. Was the Prisoner-of-War Organization a department of the OKW?
MILCH: In my opinion, yes.
MR. ROBERTS: Which was called KGW, Kriegsgefangenenwesen?