dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
ROSENBERG: "I expressly request that you prohibit the removal of cultural objects of any kind from your Reichskommissariat, by any agencies whatsoever, without your approval. What confiscated cultural objects will remain in the Reichskommissariat Ostland and what may possibly be utilized for specialized research work must come under a later regulation. I request that you inform your subordinate general and district commissioners of this directive. The national administration of museums, libraries, et cetera, regardless of the right of inspection and inventory by the Einsatzstab, remain unaffected by this directive." I shall come back to this directive later when replying to the accusation by the Soviet Prosecution regarding the administration of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.
DR. THOMA: We come now to the furniture operation in France.
ROSENBERG: I am not finished with this matter yet, because exceptionally serious charges have been preferred in this matter. I refer to a second directive of the Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories, dated 7 April 1942, in which, at the end, under I, the fundamental principles I have just read are reiterated. It is in Document Book 2, Page 94. All are told to refrain entirely from independent action. Under II, it says verbatim: "In special cases, as an exception, immediate steps can be Taken to secure or remove items to a safe place in order to evade threatening dangers-that is, danger of collapse of buildings, enemy action, climatic influences, et cetera." I shall come back to this in connection with the accusation of the Soviet Government regarding happenings in Minsk. When Document 076-PS was read, it said at, the end that there was never any order given for the protection of cultural objects. This order has been presented here twice. Further, I would like to refer to a directive of 3 October 1941 by the Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories to the staff leader of the Einsatzstab in the same document-wherein I again call special attention to the document which I have just read. In addition, I call the Tribunal's attention to an order of the High Command of the Army of 30 September 1942, which was issued in agreement with the Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories. Here also it says literally at the end, under I, . . .
DR. THOMA: Is that Page 89 of the document book?
THE PRESIDENT: Which is that? September '42?
ROSENBERG: 30 September 1942.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I have got that. What about the one of October '41? Where is that?
ROSENBERG: October 41?
THE PRESIDENT: October '41.
ROSENBERG: That is 3 October 1941.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you know where it is, Dr. Thoma?
DR. THOMA: It is contained in Document 1015-PS, Exhibit USA-385, but it may be that this document is not listed in this particular index. In my document I cannot locate it at the moment, but it belongs to 1015-PS and was submitted in its entirety.
ROSENBERG: And the order of the Army High Command of 30 September 1942 says, under I: "Except for special cases, in which the safeguarding of endangered works of culture is urgent, efforts will be made to leave them in their present location for the time being. For this purpose, according to reciprocal agreements between the Quartermaster General of the General Staff of the Army and the Einsatzstab of Reichsleiter Rosenberg, the latter has been granted authority to: c) in order to safeguard against damage or destruction in the operational area of the East also such works of culture which do not fall under paragraph b- especially museum pieces-to protect and/or place them in security." At the end of this directive, it says under IV: "Independent of the missions of the Einsatzstab of Reichsleiter Rosenberg, according to Section I, a, b, c, the troops and all military offices located in the operational area are instructed now, as before, to preserve valuable art objects if possible and to protect them from destruction or damage." I believed it my duty to prove, at least very briefly, that my Einsatzstab, as well as the military offices, issued clear directives and orders for the protection, even during these bitter battles, of objects of art of the Russian, Ukrainian, and White Ruthenian people.
DR. THOMA: Herr Rosenberg, you know that Hitler and Goering diverted some of the objects of art which were confiscated in France. What part did you play in this matter?
ROSENBERG: In principle the Fuehrer specified, as can be seen from information given by the then Field Marshal Keitel, upon order of the Fuehrer, that he reserved for himself the disposition of these works and any decision related hereto. I do not wish to dispute in any way that I had the hope that at least a large part of these objects of art would remain in Germany, particularly since, in the course of time, many German cultural works were destroyed by particularly severe bombing in the West. These works of art were to be a sort of security for later negotiations. When Reich Marshal Goering, who by directive of the Fuehrer particularly supported this work of the Einsatzstab, earmarked a number of these works of art for his collection, I was- I must say frankly, as the record states-a little uneasy, because with this commission I had taken on a certain responsibility in my name for the total of the confiscated cultural and art objects, and I was, therefore, obligated to catalog them in their entirety and to keep them available for any negotiations or decisions. Therefore, I directed my deputy to make as complete a list as possible of those things which the Reich Marshal, with the approval of the Fuehrer, was diverting for his collection. I knew that Reich Marshal Goering intended later to give this collection to the German Reich and not to bequeath it privately. In the interrogation record which was produced and read on this point by the French Prosecution there is also a regrettable error to be found. It says that I had been uneasy because Reich Marshal Goering had misappropriated these works of art. In German, the term "entwendet" means as much as to take illegally (to embezzle). What I said, however, was "verwendet," which has a different meaning.
DR. THOMA: Mr. President, I would like to point out in this connection the fact that the French used the word "detourne," which means "divert."
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn now. [A recess was taken.]
DR. THOMA: I now turn to the furniture operation in France, and for that purpose I am showing the defendant Document 001-PS, also Volume II of the French Document Book, and I am asking the defendant to state his views with respect to it. [The document was submitted to the defendant.]
ROSENBERG: Document 001-PS contains, at the beginning, information to the effect that in the East accommodations were found to be so dreadful that I was proposing that ownerless Jewish homes in France and their furniture should be made available for that purpose. This suggestion was approved in a decree issued, by order of the Fuehrer, by the Reich Minister and Chief of the Reich Chancellery on 31 December 1941. In the course of the ever increasing bombardment in Germany, I considered that I no longer could take responsibility for this, and thus I made a suggestion that this furniture should be placed at the disposal of bombed out victims in Germany-which amounted to more than 100,000 people on certain nights that emergency aid would be given to them. In the report of the French Document Book it is stated in the seventh paragraph how the confiscation was carried out: that these deserted apartments were sealed, that they remained sealed for some time in the event of possible claims, and that then the shipment to Germany was carried out. I am aware that this, no doubt, was a serious encroachment on private property; but here again, in connection with previous considerations, I thought about the implications and, finally, of the millions of homeless Germans. I want to emphasize in this connection that I kept myself well informed; that the homes, their owners, and the main contents in the way of furniture were recorded in detail in a big book, as a basis for possible negotiations at a later date. In Germany the matter was so arranged that those people who suffered damage by bombing paid for these furnishings and household goods, which were placed at their disposal; and these deliveries were deducted from the claims which they had against the state. That money was paid into a special fund administered by the Minister of Finance. The Document 001-PS contains under Number 2 a suggestion which I myself consider a serious charge against me.
ROSENBERG: This is a suggestion that in view of many murders of Germans in France, not only Frenchmen should be shot as hostages, but that Jewish citizens also were to be called to account. I should like to say that I considered these shootings of hostages, since they were announced publicly, a permissible measure under special circumstances in wartime. The fact that this sort of thing was being done by the Armed Forces appeared to me according to the result of the usual investigations, the more so since it was taking place in a territory, a State with which the German Reich had signed an armistice. Secondly, this happened during a period of excitement, due to the war which had just broken out with the United States of America and to our recollection of the report from the Polish Ambassador, Count Potocki, dated 30 January 1939, which the Tribunal has forbidden to be read. In spite of everything, however, I must say that I consider this suggestion as a personal injustice. Looking at it from the legal side, I would like to point out that in Document 1015-PS, under letter Y. there is a letter from the Reich Minister and Chief of the Reich Chancellery, which is dated 31 December 1941, and in which it says: "Your memorandum dated 18 December 1941 has been submitted to the Fuehrer. The Fuehrer has agreed in principle with the suggestion under 1. A copy of that part of the memorandum which deals with the utilization of Jewish household goods I have sent to the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces and the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands, together with a letter of which a copy is attached hereto." In this matter Point 1 was accepted and tacitly, though just as emphatically, Point 2, which deals with this suggestion, was turned down. This suggestion, therefore, had no legal consequences. Later on I never again referred to this suggestion, and I must say that I had forgotten all about it until it was again put before me here.
DR. THOMA: I now turn to the subject, "Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories." The defendant is eager to express his opinion with regard to Molotov's note-that he, the defendant, was a Czarist spy-since this affects his personal character. I therefore ask the defendant whether he at any time had relations with the Czarist police.
ROSENBERG: No.
GEN. RUDENKO: Mr. President, the Indictment which has been presented to the Defendant Rosenberg at no point incriminates him of having been a Czarist spy. Therefore, we consider that this question is irrelevant.
DR. THOMA: The Molotov notes have been submitted to the Tribunal, and so have been put in evidence. Therefore, I think that I may be permitted to put that question.
THE PRESIDENT: He has answered in the negative already, so you can pass from it, can't you? It has formed no part of the Indictment.
DR. THOMA: Yes. [Turning to the defendant] When did you learn that you were proposed for the position of Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories, and for what reason were you given this commission?
ROSENBERG: May I state with regard to this that at the very beginning of April-as far as I can remember it was 2 April 1941-the Fuehrer summoned me in the morning and explained to me that he regarded a military clash with the Soviet Union as inevitable. As reasons he quoted two points: first, the military occupation of Romanian territory-that is to say, Bessarabia and North Bukovina; second, the continual reenforcing for a long time and on a gigantic scale of the Red Army along the line of demarcation and in Soviet Russian territory generally. These facts were so striking that he had already given the relevant military and other orders and had decided to assign me as a political adviser in a decisive capacity. Thus I was faced with a fait accompli, and an attempt even to discuss the matter was countered by the Fuehrer with the remark that the orders had been given and that scarcely anything could be altered in the matter, whereupon I told the Fuehrer that, of course, I wished the best of luck to the German arms, and I was at his disposal for the political advice which he desired. Immediately afterwards I caned a meeting of some of my closest assistants, since I did not know whether the military operations would be starting very soon or later on. We made a number of drafts concerning the possible treatment of political problems and possible measures to be taken in the territories to be occupied in the East. These drafts have been submitted here. On 20 April 1 received a preliminary task, which was to form a central department for dealing with Eastern questions and to get in touch with the highest Reich authorities concerned with these matters.
DR. THOMA: I should like to submit to the defendant the instructions which he drafted after his appointment. I have just one more request to the Tribunal. These instructions are now crossed out in the photostatic copy and bear all sorts of remarks. I request, therefore, that the Tribunal take personal cognizance of the photostatic copies so that they can see how these instructions have been crossed out. The documents themselves have already been submitted to the Tribunal as numbered exhibits.
ROSENBERG: May I refer to these documents-1017-PS, 1028-PS, 1029-PS, and 1030-PS...
THE PRESIDENT: They have already been put in evidence?
DR. THOMA: Yes, they have been put in. [Turning to the defendant.] May I ask you to state the exhibit numbers?
ROSENBERG: I have just mentioned the exhibit numbers.
DR. THOMA: What are the USA exhibit numbers?
ROSENBERG: Document Number 1028-PS has Exhibit Number USA-273; Document 1030-PS has Exhibit USA-144. On the others 1 do not find any USA numbers.
DR. THOMA: Document 1017-PS is Exhibit USA-142; Document 1028-PS is Exhibit USA-273; Document 029-PS is Exhibit USA-145; Document 1030-PS is Exhibit USA-144. They are contained in the special document book for the Defendant Rosenberg. I state in this connection that these are provisional drafts, with notations by the secretary, from the end of April and the beginning of May. These provisional drafts were not released but, as can be seen, were crossed out and supplemented with written remarks in the margin; and, in addition, they contain viewpoints which later on were not approved by the Fuehrer. For this very reason, as far as the Ukraine is concerned they could not be applied at all. The written instructions which went out to the Reich Commissioners for the East and the Ukraine, after the Ministry for the Occupied Eastern Territories had been formed, were unfortunately not found, so that I cannot refer to them.
DR. THOMA: On 20 June 1941-that is to say, one day before the outbreak of the war against Russia-did you make a speech to everybody concerned with Eastern affairs regarding those Eastern problems? The document concerned here is Exhibit USA-147, from which the Prosecution quoted a single paragraph several times.
ROSENBERG: This is a fairly long impromptu speech made before those who were concerned with, and assigned to deal with Eastern problems. With regard to this, I state that it was my duty, as a matter of course, to consider political measures which would have to be proposed to avoid a situation in which the German Reich would have to fight every 25 years for its existence in the East; and I should like to emphasize that that which I authentically said in a confidential speech does not correspond in any way with the Soviet accusations that I was in favor of a systematic extermination of the Slavic peoples. I do not wish to occupy the Tribunal's time by reading very much here; nevertheless I would like to read a few paragraphs to justify myself. It says on Page 3 (Exhibit USA-147): "Originally, Russian history was a purely Continental affair. For 200 years Moscow-Russia lived under the Tartar yoke, and its face was mainly turned to the East. The Russian traders and hunters opened up the East as far as the Urals. Some Cossack treks went to Siberia, and the colonization of Siberia is no doubt one of the great accomplishments of history." I think that this expresses my attitude of respect toward that historic achievement. On Page 6 it says: "From this it follows that Germany's aim is the freedom of the Ukrainian people. This must without fail be made a point in our political program. In what form and to what extent a Ukrainian State can be formed later is of no purport just now.... One must proceed cautiously in this direction. Literature dealing with the Ukrainian struggles must be promoted so that the Ukrainian people's historical consciousness can be revived. A university would have to be founded in Kiev, technical colleges established, the Ukrainian language cultivated, et cetera." I have quoted this as documentary evidence of the fact that it was not my intention to destroy the culture of the peoples of the East.
ROSENBERG: In the next paragraph I pointed out that it was important to win, in the course of time, the voluntary cooperation of the 40 minion people in the Ukraine. On Page 7 reference is made to the possible occupation of the Caucasian territories as follows: "Here the aim will not be to establish a Caucasian National State but to find a solution on Federal lines which, with German help, might go so far as to influence these people to ask Germany to protect their cultural and national existence." Here, too, there is no question of a desire to exterminate. Now comes a matter which has been described by the American Prosecution as a particularly serious, incriminating factor. It deals with the so-called colonization and the property of German peoples in the East. This paragraph is worded as follows: "Quite apart from all these problems, there is a question which is of an equally general nature, and which we must all think about-namely, the question of German property. German people have worked in this immense territory for centuries. The result of that work, among other things, was the acquisition of vast lands. The land confiscated in the Baltic countries can be compared in size with East Prussia; the entire real estate in the Black Sea was as great as Wuritemberg, Baden, and Alsace put together. In the Black Sea area more land was cultivated than is arable in England. These comparisons of size must make it clear to us that the Germans there did not idly exploit or plunder the people, but that they did constructive work. And the result of this work is German national property; irrespective of earlier individual owners. Just how that may one day be compensated cannot yet be considered. But a . . . legal basis can be established." I wished to quote this so that I can refer to it later on when we deal with the agrarian problem, particularly in respect to the Reich Commission East, where in spite of these reflections the 700 year old German property was not restored but handed to the Estonians, Latvians, and Lithuanians by law, as has been proved.
ROSENBERG: In a later paragraph it states: "We must declare in this connection that even now we are not enemies of the Russian people..."
THE PRESIDENT: Are you still reading from Document 1058-PS? ROSENBERG: Yes. I continue to quote the following paragraph: "We must declare in this connection that even now we are not enemies of the Russian people. All of us who knew the Russians before know that the individual Russian is a very likable person, capable of assimilating culture, but lacking only in the strength of character possessed by the Western European... Our fight for a regrouping is conducted quite in line with the right of national self-determination of peoples...." I shall not read to the Tribunal the end, which they can later take cognizance of in detail if they so wish. I made that speech fully convinced that, after my first expository remarks to the Fuehrer about the subject, he had essentially agreed with me. I did not know-and he did not tell me-that other military and police orders had already been issued; otherwise it would have been practically impossible for me-and particularly in Heydrich's presence-to make a speech which obviously contradicted flatly the conceptions of Himmler and Heydrich. As far as the passage from this document which had been quoted by the Prosecution is concerned, I have the following to say: I heard from people working on the Four Year Plan that, in the event of an occupation of the Moscow industrial region and of far-reaching destruction by war operations, large-scale industries could no longer continue, and that activities would probably be limited to operating a number of key industries only. That would necessarily result in considerable unemployment. Besides, it was not clear how large the supply reserves in the East were, and in view of the general food situation and of the blockade the German food supply had to be a primary consideration. This is back of the remark that under certain circumstances a large-scale evacuation of Russian territories might be necessary where large numbers of industrial workers might become unemployed.
THE PRESIDENT: And in connection therewith, I should like to refer to Document 1056-PS, which contains the first directive from the Ministry for Eastern Affairs, according to which the providing of food supplies for the population also was made a special duty.
DR. THOMA: On 17 July 1941 you were appointed, by decree of the Fuehrer, to act as Reich Minister for the administration of the newly occupied Eastern Territories. On the preceding day there had been a conference between Hitler, Keitel, Goering, and Lammers, during which you stated your administrative program in detail I refer to Document L221, Exhibit USA-317 and ask you to comment upon it. It is on Page 123 in Rosenberg Document Book 2.
ROSENBERG: This document, which is obviously a final resume by Bormann, has, of course, been submitted here four or five times. During that meeting I had actually not intended to present a voluminous program, but this session had been called for the purpose of discussing the wording of the intended Fuehrer decrees concerning the administration of the Occupied Eastern Territories and to give all the participants an opportunity to state their views on that subject. I was also preoccupied with a number of questions dealing with personnel, which I wanted to submit to the Fuehrer. I was surprised, therefore, when the Fuehrer began passionately, and at considerable length, to expound this policy in the East while making many unexpected observations for me. I had the impression that the Fuehrer himself was aroused by the unanticipated powerful armament of the Soviet Union and our hard struggle against the Red Army. That had obviously caused the Fuehrer to make some of the statements to which I may perhaps refer at the end. In the presence of the other witnesses, I countered the unexpected statements of the Fuehrer, and in addition I should like to read from Bormann's record the following paragraphs which have not been read until now. I quote from the original Document L221 on Page 4: "Reich Leader Rosenberg emphases that, in accordance with his views, each Kommissariat would require a different treatment of the population. In the Ukraine we would have to initiate a program furthering art and culture. We would have to awaken the historical consciousness of the Ukrainians, and establish a university at Kiev, and the like. The Reich Marshal, on the other hand, points out that we have to think first of guaranteeing our food supply-everything else should be dealt with later. "(Incidental question: Is there still anything like an educated class in the Ukraine, or are upperclass Ukrainians to be found only as emigrants outside present day Russia?)" This is a comment by Bormann.