dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
JODL: Yes, they were divisional troops which carried out police work among the troops. Then came the rear area of the armies which was under the commanding generals of the armies, and behind that were the lines of communication of the Army which comprised all the supply units and services of the Quartermaster General of the Army. In this main sector-which was by far the largest sector as it comprised 97 percent of the entire operational area-the entire Police and everything which did not belong to the Army organically was not under the command of the Army, as far as tasks were concerned, but under the Police, under the Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler. Only from the standpoint of servicing the troops-that is, with regard to their supplies or movements during advance or retreat-did the Army, of course, have the right to give orders to the troops regarding their movements and their accommodation.
DR. LATERNSER: Schellenberg states that in the rear operational areas and in the rear areas of the Army these special task groups came under the Army only as far as supplies were concerned; and as far as orders and tasks were concerned, under the Reich Security Main Office. Is that correct?
JODL: That is correct. The entire Police received orders about what they were to do from Himmler only.
DR. LATERNSER: Schellenberg also states further in his Affidavit Number 12, Document 3710-PS, Exhibit USA-557, that this subordination as regards troop servicing also included the question of discipline. Is that true?
JODL: That is wrong. An officer of the Army could never punish a member of the Police or the SS.
DR. LATERNSER: As has been established, the chief task of these special task groups was to carry out mass extermination of Jews and Communists. Schellenberg states in his Affidavit Number 12 that he was convinced that the commanding generals of the army groups and armies had been clearly informed of these tasks through official channels. Since Schellenberg has stated his conviction in this affidavit I ask you to give us yours, because I think I am right in assuming that you were with the best informed officers of the Armed Forces.
JODL: I cannot, of course, judge exactly what the commanding generals actually experienced while they were together at the front; but I can say with absolute certainty that I have never seen an order which revealed that these police units had been sent into the operational zone for any other purpose than that of maintaining quiet and order, from the police point of view, and uncovering revolts and partisan activities. I have never seen a report or an order which contained anything other than that.
DR. LATERNSER: Do you believe, Generaloberst, that the commanding generals of the armies or army groups would have tolerated those conditions without protest?
JODL: I consider that out of the question, because even in the case of much smaller incidents they raised the most violent protects. Hundreds of documents which have been offered by the Prosecution here show how the troops at the front had objected to measures which they considered inadmissible from a humane point of view or dangerous to peace and order in the occupied territories. I have only to remind you of Blaskowitz' memorandum, which was one of the first.
DR. LATERNSER: Did you read that memorandum?
JODL: No, I did not read it. I only heard about it.
DR. LATERNSER: Furthermore, the Prosecution have submitted Affidavit Number is from Rittmeister Wilhelm Scheidt. It is Document 3711-PS, Exhibit USA-558. Scheidt says in this affidavit, and I quote from Page 2: "It was a generally known fact that the partisan fights were conducted with cruelty on both sides." I skip a sentence. He goes on to say: "There is no question but that these facts must have been known to the leading officers in the Armed Forces Operations Staff and in the General Staff of the Army. It was also known that it was Hitler's view that in the fight against partisans only the use of cruel, intimidating punishment could be successful." Is Rittmeister Scheidt's statement correct, namely, that the leading officers of the Armed Forces Operations Staff and the General Staff of the Army knew of the cruelty employed by both sides in the partisan fighting?
JODL: What we knew about the conduct of partisan warfare has already been submitted to this Tribunal. I refer to the instructions which I signed regarding the combating of partisans in Document F-665, Exhibit RF-411. It begins with a lengthy discourse on how the partisans conducted this war. Of course, we did not invent this. This was extracted from hundreds of reports. That troops in such a fight, seeing the methods employed by the enemy, would on their-part not be exactly mild can readily be imagined. In spite of that the directives which we issued never contained a word to the effect that no prisoners were to be taken in these partisan fights. On the contrary, all reports showed that the number taken prisoner was larger by far than the number killed. That it was the Fuehrer's view that in their fight against the partisans the troops should in no way be restricted is authentically proved by the many arguments which I, as well as the General Staff of the Army, had with the Fuehrer on this subject.
DR. LATERNSER: What if the commanding generals received reports about cruelties committed by their own soldiers?
JODL: Then they would be court-martialed. That again is established in the documents. I remind you of an order, issued by the Fuehrer, which begins with the sentence, "It has been reported to me that individual soldiers of the Armed Forces have been dealt with by court martial because of their behavior when fighting partisans."
DR. LATERNSER: And that was the only thing the commanding general could do in a case like that?
JODL: There was no other way open. And even on these orders, he always acted in accordance with his own legal judgment. Who could stop him from doing that?
DR. LATERNSER: The Prosecution have also submitted Affidavit Number 15, by General Rottiger, Document 5713-PS which is numbered Exhibit USA-559. In this affidavit General Rottiger states, in the middle of Page 1: "Only now, on the strength of documents put before me, do I realize that in issuing the order to employ the severest measures to combat partisans, the highest levels might possibly have had in mind the final aim of using this combating of partisans by the Army to achieve the relentless extermination of Jewry and other undesirable elements." Did the military leadership at the highest level hold any such point of view, and was that their final aim?
JODL: No. Of course, one is wise after the event. I too have learned many things today which I did not know before. However, this knowledge does not apply at all here, because there were next to no Jews among the partisans. In the main, these partisans were fanatical Russian fighters-mostly White Russians-and were as hard as steel. And, to a question put by my counsel, even the witness Bach-Zelewski had to admit that there were just about no Jews among these partisans. As regards the extermination of Slavs, I can only say that the Slavs who were killed in the partisan fighting amounted to no more than one-twentieth or one-thirtieth of the numbers which in the normal, large-scale battles with the Soviet Russian armies the Russians lost in dead or wounded. As far as figures are concerned, that carries no weight at all. Therefore that is a completely erroneous view.
DR. LATERNSER: A further Affidavit, Number 16, by the same General Rottiger, was submitted by the Prosecution under Document 5714-PS, Exhibit Number USA-560. In the last sentence General Rottiger states the following, and I quote: "Although generally speaking one knew what the special tasks of the SD units were, and although this apparently happened with the knowledge of the highest leaders of the Armed Forces, we opposed these methods as far as possible since it meant endangering our own troops." In other words, General Rottiger, in his affidavit, maintains that the special tasks of the SD units were apparently carried out with the knowledge of the highest military leaders. If that is correct, then, you, Generaloberst, must have known about the tasks and these questions you have already...
JODL: Yes, I have already answered. I have never spoken to a single officer who had knowledge of these matters and told me about them.
DR. LATERNSER: Also, in the case against the General Staff and the OKW, the Prosecution have submitted Affidavit 17, Document 3715-PS, Exhibit Number USA-562. This affidavit comes from SS Leader Rode. Rode states, at the top of Page 2: 'As proof, one can quote the OKW and OKH order which stated that all members of partisan groups who had been captured, such as Jews, agents, and political commissars, were to be handed over by the troops to the SD for 'special treatment' without delay. Apart from that, this order contained instructions that in guerrilla fighting no prisoners, apart from the above-mentioned, were to be taken." Generaloberst, was there such an order that in guerrilla fighting no prisoners were to be taken?
JODL: Such an order never existed. I have never seen such an order. It was not contained in the instructions regarding guerrilla fighting. Apart from that, practically every word in that statement is untrue. There never was an order from the OKW-OKH-that is, an order which came from both departments. Jews among the guerrillas. I have already dealt with that. Agents among the guerrillas. Agents-that is a chapter by itself. Political commissars. That is quite another point. They were never handed over to the SD for special treatment-if they were handed over at all-because the task of the SD was an entirely different one. They may have been handed over to the Security Police. In other words, every word is untrue.
DR. LATERNSER: There is an Affidavit Number 18, by the same SS Leader Rode, which the Prosecution have submitted under Document 3716-PS, Exhibit Number USA-563. Rode states as follows in this affidavit: '.As far as is known to me, the SD special task groups, attached to the various army groups, were under the jurisdiction of the latter in every way-that is to say, tactically, as well as in every other way. For that reason, the tasks and methods of these units were fully known to the commanding generals. They approved of the tasks and methods, since apparently, they never raised any decisive objections to them." Do you know SS Leader Rode?
JODL: No, I do not know him. I do not think it is necessary to say much about this, because the General of the Police Schellenberg, who led such a special task group himself, and who really must know, has stated quite clearly on this witness stand what jurisdiction he was under and from whom he received his orders.
DR. LATERNSER: That was not the witness Schellenberg; that was Ohlendorf.
JODL: Ohlendorf? Yes.
DR. LATERNSER: Now, I have a few questions about the Commissar Order. Were you present at the conference when Hitler gave the Commissar Order orally to the commanding generals?
JODL: As far as I remember, right at the beginning he spoke only to the Commander-in-Chief of the Army, or the Chief of the General Staff and a few officers of the OKW, about this Commissar Order. As far as I recollect he referred to that order of his at a later date when addressing the commanding generals. I believe that it was during that second conference that he used the words, "I cannot expect that my generals understand my orders, but I must demand that they obey them."
DR. LATERNSER: Do you know any commanding generals who resisted that order?
JODL: Later on someone told me-I do not know whether it is true-that Field Marshal Rommel had burned this order. But...
DR. LATERNSER: Does not that recollection of yours refer to the Commando Order? General Field Marshal Rommel was...
JODL: Oh, yes, that was the Commando Order. You are talking about the Commissar Order, are you not?
DR. LATERNSER: Yes, that is right.
JODL: I remember that there were constant objections from the High Command of the Army which, unfortunately, had to carry out this order, and these went on for a long time. Officers of the General Staff told me confidentially that for the most part it was not being carried out. I know of one official application made to the Fuehrer to have this order officially withdrawn. That was done, although I cannot remember when.
DR. LATERNSER: Who made that application?
JODL: The High Command of the Army. Whether it was the Chief of the General Staff or the Commander-in-Chief, I cannot say.
DR. LATERNSER: When was this application made?
JODL: I believe it was in the spring of 1942.
DR. LATERNSER: The spring of 1942? And to that application. . .
JODL: I know for certain, the order was withdrawn.
DR. LATERNSER: Did you talk to any commanding general who approved of that order?
JODL: No. All the officers to whom I spoke considered, first, that the order should be turned down from the humane point of view and, secondly, that it was wrong from the practical point of view.
DR. LATERNSER: When Hitler gave his reasons for this order orally-and you have already told us some of them-he is supposed to have mentioned additional reasons for making it. I should like you to tell us what they were so that we may get this matter quite clear.
JODL: He gave a lengthy explanation-as he always did when he felt it necessary to convince somebody.
DR. LATERNSER: Did he state . . .
THE PRESIDENT: Have not these reasons already been given?
DR. LATERNSER: As far as I am informed; Mr. President, they have not yet all been given. [Turning to the defendant.] During that conference did Hitler state . . .
THE PRESIDENT: One moment. Haven't you already given the reasons which, you say, Hitler gave for this order?
JODL: I have not given some very important reasons, which the Fuehrer also pointed out. They were...
THE PRESIDENT: Wait a minute. Dr. Laternser, I have already had to ask you to be more brief on many occasions in which you have examined witnesses, and really you have spent over an hour already on this High Command Staff. Every witness who comes to the box you take a very long time over, and the Tribunal think that a great deal of their time has been wasted by you. Now, this witness can give any further reasons, but I do not want any argument about it. He can give his explanation now.
JODL: I have only to add that the Fuehrer said on that occasion: "If you do not believe what I am telling you, then read the reports from Counterintelligence which we have received regarding the behavior of the Russian commissars in the occupied Baltic states. Then you will get a picture of what can be expected from these commissary." He also stated that.
DR. LATERNSER: I should like to put a question to you about the report in Document 884-PS, submitted under Exhibit USSR-351.
THE PRESIDENT: Repeat the number please.
DR. LATERNSER: Number 884-PS, it is a document submitted by the Russian Prosecution on 13 February, and it is on Page 151 of the second document book for General Jodl. Under Number II of this report, Page 153, there is the following statement. I quote, "To this, Reichsleiter Rosenberg in Memorandum 3 suggests..." I do not want to read further. The next is a suggestion. I would like to ask you for what reason this Number II was brought out in this report.
JODL: I can only guess because I did not write it. But I have no doubt...
THE PRESIDENT: We do not want his guesses, you know. If he can only guess, then he had better not guess. We want evidence, not guesses.
DR. LATERNSER: Yes, I will dispense with this question. I assumed that the witness would have personal knowledge about that. Witness, you said yesterday that the Commando Order of 18 October 1942 had been changed-that is, partially revoked by application of the Commander, West. Who was that Commander, West who had applied for that change?
JODL: General Field Marshal Von Rundstedt, and he applied to have the entire order withdrawn.
DR. LATERNSER: You know the order by General Von Reichenau which the Russian Prosecution submitted on 13 February as Document USSR-12? It is dated 10 October 1941. Do you know the reasons this order was issued?
JODL: Yes. Reichenau, at that time, was commanding general of the 6th Army, and in his army sector was the town of Kiev. This morning I already started to describe events that took place in Kiev at the end of September, and that was the reason for this order.
DR. LATERNSER: How did the commanding generals exercise their jurisdiction-strictly, or not so strictly?
JODL: I know this because Dr. Lehmann...
THE PRESIDENT: That has nothing to do with the charge against the High Command. There is no charge against the High Command for having arranged courts martial or administering their courts martial improperly.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, I believe I am of a different opinion on this point. If the commanding generals heard of any breaches of discipline or atrocities...
THE PRESIDENT: Do you know of anything in the Indictment, or anything in the evidence, which charges the High Command, or any member of the High Command, with improper behavior at a court martial, or in connection with a court martial?
DR. LATERNSER: No. I merely want to discover the typical attitude of the High Command. [Turning to the defendant.] What do you know about the reasons for the mass deaths which occurred among Russian prisoners of war during the winter of 1941?
JODL: I am informed on this subject because several adjutants of the Fuehrer were sent there personally, and they reported to the Fuehrer in my presence. We were mostly concerned with the mass deaths after the last great battle for the Viazma pocket. The reason for the mass deaths was described by the Fuehrer's adjutants as follows: The half-famished encircled Russian armies had put up fanatical resistance during the last 8 or 10 days. They literally lived on the bark of trees and roots because they had retreated to impenetrable wooded country, and when they fell into our hands they were in such a condition that they could hardly move. It was impossible to transport them. The situation as regards supplies was critical, because the railway system had been destroyed, so that it was impossible to take them all away. There were no accommodations nearby. Only immediate careful hospital treatment could have saved the majority of them. Soon afterwards the rain started, and then the cold set in, and that is the reason why such a large number of those prisoners-particularly these prisoners of Viazma- died. That is the report of the Fuehrer's adjutants who had been sent there to investigate. Similar reports came from the Quartermaster General of the Army.
DR. LATERNSER: What do you know about the shelling of Leningrad by German artillery? You remember that a witness has been examined here on that point?
JODL: I was present during two conferences which the Fuehrer himself had with the German artillery commander who was in charge of the artillery before Leningrad. He brought along the exact target chart, and it showed a very carefully worked-out system, according to which only key plants in Leningrad were marked as necessary targets, so as to cripple the power of resistance of the fortress. They were mostly factories which were still producing munitions. The ammunition for this heavy artillery, only a small portion of which could reach the center of Leningrad, was so scarce that one had to be extremely economical in its use. They were mostly captured guns from France, and we only had as much ammunition as we had captured.
DR. LATERNSER: You know that the witness has asserted that in his opinion the artillery deliberately destroyed the castles in Leningrad. You have seen the target chart for this artillery?
JODL: Yes; I myself had the artillery target chart in my brief case for many weeks. Only the armament industry was marked on it. It would have been insane to shoot at anything else. OF course, every artilleryman knows that through dispersion the shots can fall elsewhere.
DR. LATERNSER: What do you know about the order from Hitler and the OKH to destroy dwellings and fireplaces during the retreat in the winter of 1941? What was the reason for that order?
JODL: The reasons are that...
DR. LATERNSER: I refer to the Order USSR-130. Unfortunately, I have not been able to ascertain on what day the Prosecution presented this order. I shall ascertain it later and have the Tribunal informed.
JODL: During that frightful winter battle, with a temperature of 48 degrees of frost, the commanders at the front reported to the Fuehrer in his headquarters that this battle was exclusively a battle for warm shelter. Those who did not have some sort of heating arrangement-that is to say, a village with serviceable stoves- could not hold out and would not be able to fight the following day. One could say it was really a fight for stoves. And when, because of this, we were forced to retreat, the Fuehrer then ordered that those fireplaces must be destroyed-not only the houses but also the fireplaces were to be blown up-because in such a critical situation that alone would prevent the Russians from pursuing. Since, in accordance with the Hague Regulations for Land Warfare, every type of destruction is permissible which is absolutely necessary from the military point of view, I believe that for this type of winter warfare-and it happened only during the winter-that order can be justified.
DR. LATERNSER: What do you know about the case of Katyn?
JODL: Regarding the finding of these mass graves, I received the first report through my propaganda department, which was informed through its propaganda company attached to the army group. I heard-that the Reich Police Criminal Department had been given the task of investigating the whole affair, and I then sent an officer from my propaganda department to the exhumation to check the findings of the foreign experts. I received a report which, in general, tallies with the report which is contained in the White Book issued, I think, by the Foreign Office. I have never heard anyone raise any doubts as to the facts as they were presented.
DR. LATERNSER: You have also seen the film which the Russian Prosecution have shown in this courtroom, and which showed atrocities committed in the Yugoslav theater of war. Can you explain any of the pictures which you perhaps still recollect?
JODL: I believe that every picture shown in this courtroom is, and was, perfectly truthful as a picture. These were captured photographs. But it has never been said what the photographs represented. It was not clear from the film whether the dog that was mauling a human being was not photographed in an army dog training center.
THE PRESIDENT: That is mere argument.
DR. LATERNSER: I was about to stop him.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
DR. LATERNSER: I was thinking of certain photographs which you might be able to clarify with a statement as: "I remember one photograph of a police dog jumping at a human being or a dummy." Can you say...