dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
MAJOR BARRINGTON: My Lord, I had just read from the letter of appointment as Minister in Vienna which Hitler sent to Von Papen on the 26th of July 1934. This letter, which, of course, was made public, naturally did not disclose the real intention of Von Papen's appointment. The actual mission of Von Papen was frankly stated shortly after his arrival in Vienna in the course of a private conversation he had with the American Minister, Mr. Messersmith. I quote from Mr. Messersmith's affidavit, which is Document 1760- PS, Exhibit USA-57, and it is on Page 22 of the document book, just about half way through the second paragraph. Mr. Messersmith said: "When I did call on Von Papen in the German Legation, he greeted me with: 'Now you are in my Legation and I can control the conversation.' In the baldest and most cynical manner he then proceeded to tell me that all of southeastern Europe, to the borders of Turkey, was Germany's natural hinterland and that he had been charged with the mission of facilitating German economic and political control over all this region for Germany. He blandly and directly said that getting control of Austria was to be the first step. He definitely stated that he was in Austria to undermine and weaken the Austrian Government and from Vienna to work towards the weakening of the governments in the other states to the south and southeast. He said that he intended to use his reputation as a good Catholic to gain influence with certain Austrians, such as Cardinal Innitzer, towards that end." Throughout the earlier period of his mission to Austria, Von Papen's activity was characterized by the assiduous avoidance of any appearance of intervention.
MAJOR BARRINGTON: His true mission was re-affirmed with clarity several months after its commencement when he was instructed by Berlin that "during the next 2 years nothing can be undertaken which will give Germany external political difficulties," and that every appearance of German intervention in Austrian affairs must be avoided; and Von Papen himself stated to Berger WaIdenegg, an Austrian Foreign Minister, "Yes, you have your .French and English friends now, and you can have your independence a little longer." All of that was told in detail by Mr. Alderman, again quoting from Mr. Messersmith's affidavit, which is in the transcript at Pages 492 (Volume II, Page 354), 506, and 507 (Volume II, Pages 362-364). Throughout this earlier period, the Nazi movement was gaining strength in Austria without openly admitted German intervention; and Germany needed more time to consolidate its diplomatic position. These reasons for German policy were frankly expressed by the German Foreign Minister Von Neurath in conversation with the American Ambassador to France; this was read into the transcript at Page 520 (Volume II, Page 381) by Mr. Alderman from Document L-150, Exhibit USA-65. The Defendant Von Papen accordingly restricted his activities to the normal ambassadorial function of cultivating an respectable elements in Austria, and ingratiating himself in these circles. Despite his facade of strict nonintervention, Von Papen remained in contact with subversive elements in Austria. Thus in his report to Hitler, dated 17 May 1935, he advised concerning Austrian-Nazi strategy as proposed by Captain Leopold, leader of the illegal Austrian Nazis, the object of which was to trick Dr. Schuschnigg into establishing an Austrian coalition government with the Nazi Party. This is Document 2247-PS, Exhibit USA-64, and it is in the transcript at Pages 516 to 518 (Volume II, Pages 379, 380). It is on Page 34 of the English document book.
MAJOR BARRINGTON: I don't want to read this letter again, but I would like to call the attention of the Tribunal to the first line of what appears as the second paragraph in the English text, where Von Papen, talking about this strategy of 'Captain Leopold, says, "I suggest that we take an active part in this game." I mention also in connection with the illegal organizations in Austria, Document 812-PS, Exhibit USA-61, which the Tribunal will remember was a report from Rainer to Buerckel and which is dealt with in the transcript at Pages 493 to 505 (Volume II, Pages 367 to 376). Eventually the agreement of 11 July 1936 between Germany and Austria was negotiated by Von Papen. This is already in evidence as Document TC-22 Exhibit GB-20. The public form of this agreement provides that while Austria in her policy should regard herself as a German state, yet Germany would recognize the fun sovereignty of Austria and would not exercise direct or indirect influence on the inner political order of Austria. More interesting was the secret part of the agreement, revealed by Mr. Messersmith, which ensured the Nazis an influence in the Austrian Cabinet and participation in the political life of Austria. This has already been read into the transcript at Page 522 (Volume II, Page 383) by Mr. Alderman. After the agreement the Defendant Von Papen continued to pursue his policy by maintaining contact with the illegal Nazis, by trying to influence appointments to strategic Cabinet positions, and by attempting to secure official recognition of Nazi front organizations. Reporting to Hitler on 1 September 1936, he summarized his program for normalizing Austrian-German relations in pursuance of the agreement of 11 July. This is Document 2246-PS, Exhibit USA-67, on Page 33 of the English document book.
MAJOR BARRINGTON: The Tribunal will recall that he recommended "as a guiding principle, continued, patient, psychological manipulations with slowly intensified pressure directed at changing the regime." Then he mentions his discussion with the illegal party and says that he is aiming at "corporative representation of the movement in the Fatherland Front, but nevertheless is refraining from putting National Socialists in important positions for the time being." There is no need to go over again the events that led up to the meeting of Schuschnigg with Hitler in February 1938, which Von Papen arranged and which he attended, and to the Anal invasion of Austria in March 1938. It is enough if I quote from the biography again on Page 66 of the document book. It is about two-thirds of the way down the page: "Following the events of March 1938, which caused Austria's incorporation into the German Reich, Von Papen had the satisfaction of being present at the Fuehrer's side when the entry into Vienna took place, after the Fuehrer in recognition of his valuable collaboration, had on 14 February 1938, admitted him to the Party and had bestowed upon him the Golden Party Badge." And the biography continues: "At first Von Papen retired to his estate Wallerfangen in the Saar district, but soon the Fuehrer required his services again and on the 18 April 1939 appointed Von Papen German Ambassador in Ankara." Thus the fascination of serving Hitler triumphed once again, and this time it was at a date when the seizure of Czechoslovakia could have left no shadow of doubt in Papen's mind that Hitler was determined to pursue his program of aggression. One further quotation from the biography on Page 66, the last sentence of the last paragraph but one: "After his return to the Reich"-that was in 1944-"Von Papen was awarded the Knight's Cross of the War Merit Order with Swords." In conclusion, I draw the Tribunal's attention again to the fulsome praises which Hitler publicly bestowed upon Von Papen for his services, especially in the earlier days.
MAJOR BARRINGTON: I have given two instances where Hitler said "His collaboration is infinitely valuable," and again "You possess my most complete and unlimited confidence." Papen, the ex-Chancellor, the soldier, the respected Catholic, Papen the diplomat, Papen the man of breeding and culture-there was the man who could overcome the hostility and antipathy of  those respectable elements who barred Hitler's way. Papen was-to repeat the words of Sir Hartley Shawcross in his opening speech'(one of the men whose co-operation and support made the Nazi Government of Germany possible." That concludes my case. Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe will now follow with the case of Von Neurath.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: May it please the Tribunal, the presentation against the Defendant Von Neurath falls into five parts, and the first of these is concerned with the following positions and honors which he held. He was a member of the Nazi Party from 30 January 1937 until 1945, and he was awarded the Golden Party Badge on 30 January 1937. He was general in the SS. He was personally appointed Gruppenfuehrer by Hitler in September 1937 and promoted to Obergruppenfuehrer on 21 June 1943. He was Reich Minister of Foreign Affairs under the Chancellorship of the Defendant Von Papen from 2 June 1932 and under the Chancellorship of Hitler from 30 January 1933 until he was replaced by the Defendant Von Ribbentrop on 4 February 1938. He was Reich Minister from 4 February 1938 until May 1945. He was President of the Secret Cabinet Council, to which he was appointed on 4 February 1938, and he was a member of the Reich Defense Council. He was appointed Reich Protector for Bohemia and Moravia from 18 March 1939 until he was replaced by the Defendant Frick on 25 August 1943. He was awarded the Adler Order by Hitler at the time of his appointment as Reich Protector. The Defendant Ribbentrop was the only other German to receive this decoration. If the Tribunal please, these facts are collected in Document 2973-PS, which is Exhibit USA-19, and in that document, which is signed by the defendant and his counsel, the defendant makes comments on certain of these matters with which I should like to deal. He says that the award of the Golden Party Badge was made on 30 January 1937 against his will and without his being asked. I point out that this defendant not only refrained from repudiating the allegedly unwanted honor, but after receiving it, attended meetings at which wars of aggression were planned, actively participated in the rape of Austria, and tyrannized Bohemia and Moravia. The second point is that his appointment as Gruppenfuehrer was also against his will and without his being asked.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: On that point, the Prosecution submits that the wearing of the uniform, the receipt of the further promotion to Obergruppenfuehrer and the actions against Bohemia and Moravia must be considered when the defendant's submission is examined. He then says that his appointment as Foreign Minister was by Reich President Von Hindenburg. We submit we need not do more than draw attention to the personalities of the Defendant Von Papen and Hitler and to the fact that President Von Hindenburg died in 1934. This defendant continued as Foreign Minister until 1938. He then says that he was an inactive Minister from the 4th of February 1938 until May 1945. At that moment attention is drawn to the activities which will be mentioned below and to the terrible evidence as to Bohemia and Moravia which will be forthcoming from our friend the Soviet prosecutor. This defendant's next point is that the Secret Cabinet Council never sat nor conferred. I point out to the Tribunal that that was described as a select committee of the Cabinet for the deliberation of foreign affairs; and the Tribunal will find that description in Document 1774-PS, which I now put in as Exhibit GB-246. This is an extract from a book by a well-known author, and on Page 2 of the document book, the first page of that document, in about the seventh line from the bottom of the page, they will see that among the bureaus subordinated to the Fuehrer for direct counsel and assistance, number four is the Secret Cabinet Council; President: Reich Minister Baron Von Neurath. And if the Tribunal will be kind enough to turn over to Page 3, about ten lines from the top, they will see the paragraph beginning: "A Secret Cabinet Council to advise the Fuehrer in the basic problems of foreign policy has been created by the decree of 4 February 1938"-and a reference is given.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: "This Secret Cabinet Council is under the direction of Reich Minister Von Neurath, and includes the Foreign Minister, the Air Minister, the Deputy of the Fuehrer the Propaganda Minister, the Chief of the Reich Chancellery, the Commanders-in-Chief of the Army and Navy and the Chief of the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces. The Secret Cabinet council constitutes a closer staff of collaborators of the Fuehrer which consists exclusively of members of the Government of the Reich; strictly speaking it represents a select committee of the Reich Government for the deliberation on foreign affairs." In order to have the formal composition of the body, that is -shown in Document 2031-PS, which is Exhibit GB-217. I believe that has been put in. I need not read it again. The next point that the defendant makes as to his offices is that he was not a member of the Reich Defense Council. If I may very shortly take that point by stages, I remind the Tribunal that the Reich Defense Council was set up soon after Hitler's accession to power on 4 April 1933; and the Tribunal will find a note of that point in Document 2261-PS, Exhibit USA-24; and they will find that on the top of Page 12 of the document book there is a reference to the date of the establishment of the Reich Defense Council. The Reich Defense Council is also dealt with in Document 2986-PS, Exhibit USA-409, which is the affidavit of the Defendant Frick, which the Tribunal will find on Page 14. In the middle of that short affidavit, Defendant Frick says: "We were also members of the Reich Defense Council which was supposed to plan preparations in case of war which later on were published by the Ministerial Council for the Defense of the Reich." Now, that the membership of this Council included the Minister for Foreign Affairs, who was then the Defendant Von Neurath, is shown by Document EC-177, Exhibit USA-390.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: If the Tribunal will turn to Page 16 of the document book, they will find that document and, at the foot of the page, the composition of the Reich Defense Council, the permanent members including the Minister for Foreign Affairs. That document is dated "Berlin, 22 May 1933" which was during this defendant's tenure of that office. That is the first stage. The functioning of this council, with a representative of this defendant's department, Von Bulow, present, is shown by the minutes of the 12th meeting on 14 May 1936. That is Document EC-407, which I put in as Exhibit GB-247. The Tribunal will find at Page 21 that the minutes are for the 14th of May 1936, and the actual reference to an intervention of Von Bulow is in the middle of Page 22. Then, the next period was after the secret law of 4 September 1938. This defendant was, under the terms of that law, a member of the Reich Defense Council by virtue of his office as president of the Secret Cabinet Council. That is shown by the Document 2194-PS, Exhibit USA-36, which the Tribunal will find at Page 24, and if you will look at Page 24, you will see that the actual copy which was put in evidence was enclosed in a letter addressed to the Reich Protector in Bohemia and Moravia on the 4th of September 1939. It is rather curious that the Reich Protector for Bohemia and Moravia is now denying his membership in the council when the letter enclosing the law is addressed to him. But if the Tribunal win be good enough to turn on to Page 28, which is still that document, the last words on that page describe the tasks of that council and say: "The task of the Reich Defense Council consists, during peacetime, in deciding all measures for the preparation of Reich defense, and the gathering together of all forces and means of the nation in compliance with the directions of the Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: The tasks of the Reich Defense Council in wartime will be especially determined by the Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor." If the Tribunal will turn to the next page, they will see that the permanent members of the Council are listed, and that the seventh one is the President of the Secret Cabinet Council, who was, again, this defendant. I submit that that deals, for every relevant period, with this defendant's statement that he was riot a member of the Reich Defense Council. The second broad point that the Prosecution makes against this defendant is that in assuming the position of Minister of Foreign Affairs in Hitler's Cabinet, this defendant assumed charge of a foreign policy committed to breach of treaties. We say first that the Nazi Party had repeatedly and for many years made known its intention to overthrow Germany's international commitments, even at the risk of war. We refer to Sections 1 and 2 of the Party program, which, as the Tribunal has heard, was published year after year. That is on Page 32 of the document book. It is Document 1708-PS, Exhibit USA-255. I just remind the Tribunal of these Points 1 and 2: "I. We demand the unification of all Germans into Greater Germany on the basis of the right of self-determination of peoples. "2. We demand equality of rights for the German people in respect to other nations; abrogation of the peace treaties of Versailles and St. Germain." But probably clearer than that is the statement contained in Hitler's speech at Munich on the 15th of March 1939; and the Tribunal will find one of the references to that on Page 40 at the middle of the page. It begins: "My foreign policy had identical aims. My program was to abolish the Treaty of Versailles . It is absolutely nonsense for the rest of the world to pretend today that I had not announced this. program until 1933 or 1935 or 1937. Instead of listening to the foolish chatter of emigres these gentlemen should have read, merely once, what I have written, that is written a thousand times." It is futile nonsense for foreigners to raise that point.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: It would be still more futile for Hitler's Foreign Minister to suggest that he was ignorant of the aggressive designs of the policy. But I r emind the Tribunal that the acceptance of force as a means of solving international problems and achieving the objectives of Hitler's foreign policy must have been known to anyone as closely in touch with Hitler as the Defendant Von Neurath; and I remind the Tribunal simply by reference to the passages from Mein Kampf, which were quoted by my friend Major Elwyn Jones, especially those toward the end of the book, Pages 552, 553, and 554. So that the Prosecution say that by the acceptance of this foreign policy the Defendant Von Neurath assisted and promoted the accession to power of the Nazi Party. The third broad point is that in his capacity as Minister of Foreign Affairs this defendant directed the international aspects of the first phase of the Nazi conspiracy, the consolidation of control in preparation for war. As I have already indicated, from his close connection with Hitler this defendant must have known the cardinal points of Hitler's policy leading up to the outbreak of the World War, as outlined in retrospect by Hitler in his speech to his military leaders on the 23rd of November 1939. This policy had two facets: internally, the establishment of rigid control; externally, the program to release Germany from its international ties. The external program had four points: 1) Secession from the Disarmament Conference; 2) the order to re-arm Germany; 3) the introduction of compulsory military services; and 4) the remilitarization of the Rhineland. If the Tribunal will look at Page 35 in the document book, at the end of the first paragraph they will find these points very briefly set out, and perhaps I might just read that passage. It is Document 789-PS, Exhibit USA-23-about 10 lines before the break: "I had to reorganize everything, beginning with the mass of the people and extending it to the Armed Forces.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: First, reorganization of the interior, abolishment of appearances of decay and defeatist ideas, education to heroism. While reorganizing the interior, I undertook the second task: To release Germany from its international ties. Two particular characteristics are to be pointed out: Secession from the League of Nations an& denunciation of the Disarmament Conference. It was a hard decision. The number of prophets who predicted that it would lead to the occupation of the Rhineland was large, the number of believers was very small. I was supported by the nation, which stood firmly behind me, when I carried out my intentions. After that the order for rearmament. Here again there were numerous prophets who predicted misfortunes, and only a few believers. In 1935 the introduction of compulsory armed service. After that, militarization of the Rhineland, again a process believed to be impossible at that time. The number of people who put trust in me was very small. Then, beginning of the fortification of the whole country, especially in the west." Now, these are summarized in four points. The Defendant Von Neurath participated directly and personally in accomplishing each of these four aspects of Hitler's foreign policy, at the same time officially proclaiming that these measures did not constitute steps toward aggression. The first is a matter of history. When Germany left the Disarmament Conference this defendant sent telegrams dated the 14th of October 1933, to the President of the conference-and that will be found in Dokumente Der Deutschen Politik, on Page 94 of the first volume for that year. Similarly this defendant made the announcement of Germany's withdrawal from the League of Nations on the 21st of October 1933. That again will be found in the official documents.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: These are referred to in the transcript of the proceedings of the Trial, and I remind the Tribunal of the complementary documents of military preparation, which of course were read and which are Documents C-140, Exhibit USA-51, the 25th of October 1933, and C-153, Exhibit USA-43, the l2th of May 1934. These have already been read and I merely collect them for the memory and assistance of the Tribunal. The second point-the rearmament of Germany: When this defendant was Foreign Minister, on the 9th of March 1935, the German Government officially announced the establishment of the German Air Force. That is Document TC-44, Exhibit GB-11, already referred to. On the 21st of May 1935 Hitler announced a purported unilateral repudiation of the Naval, Military, and Air clauses of the Treaty of Versailles which, of course, involved a similar purported unilateral repudiation of the same clauses of the Treaty for the Restoration of Friendly Relations with the United States, and that will be found in Document 2288-PS, Exhibit USA-38, which again has already been read. On the same day the Reich Cabinet, of which this defendant was a member, enacted the secret Reich Defense Law creating the office of Plenipotentiary General for War Economy, afterwards designated by the Wehrmacht armament expert as "the cornerstone of German rearmament." The reference to the law is Document 2261-PS, Exhibit USA-24, a letter of Von Blomberg dated the 24th of June 1935, enclosing this law, which is already before the Tribunal; and the reference to the comment on' the importance of the law is Document 2353-PS, Exhibit USA-35. Some of that has already been read, but if the Tribunal will be good enough to turn to Page 52 where that appears, they will find an extract and I might just give the Tribunal the last sentence: "The new regulations were stipulated in the Reich Defense Law of 21 May 1935, supposed to be promulgated only in case of war but already declared valid for carrying out war preparations. As this law ...