The Nuremberg Trials (Vol.3). International Military Tribunal

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ determined by the Tribunal, so that if they call attention to some particular thing, either the witness can correct it or we can have the record produced. It would not be practicable to make the recording available without making reproducing machines available. While I am not a technician in that field, I would not think it would be practicable to place that at their disposal.

      THE PRESIDENT: Wouldn’t it be practicable to have a transcription made of the shorthand notes in German and, within the course of one or two days after the evidence has been given, place that transcription in the Defendants’ Counsel room?

      MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I think that is being done. I think perhaps Colonel Dostert can explain just what is being done better than I can, because he is the technician in this field. I am sure that no difficulty need arise over this matter of correct translations.

      COLONEL LEON DOSTERT (Chief of Interpreters): Your Honors, the reports of the proceedings are taken down in all four languages and every word spoken in German is taken down in German by German court stenographers. The notes are then transcribed and can be made available to Defense Counsel. Moreover, there is a mechanical recording device which registers every single word spoken in any language in the courtroom, and in case of doubt about the authenticity of the reporters’ notes, we have the further verification of the mechanical recording, so that Defense Counsel should have every opportunity to check the authenticity of the translation.

      MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I am advised further by Colonel Dostert that 25 copies of the German transcript are being delivered to the defendants each day.

      FLOTTENRICHTER KRANZBUEHLER: Mr. President, I was not informed that the German testimony is being taken down in shorthand in German. I assumed that the records handed over to us were translations. If German shorthand notes are being taken in the court, I withdraw my motion.

      THE PRESIDENT: I think we shall get on faster if the Defendants’ Counsel, before making motions, inquire into the matters about which they are making the motions.

      DR. FRITZ SAUTER (Counsel for Defendant Ribbentrop): I would like to ask a few questions of the witness.

      Witness, you previously stated that at some time an order was given, according to which, Russian prisoners of war were to be marked in a certain manner and that this order had been withdrawn by the Defendant Keitel. You did say that, did you not?

      LAHOUSEN: Yes, I said that I have knowledge that there was this purpose.

      DR. SAUTER: This is interesting from the point of view of the Defendant Ribbentrop, and I would like to hear from you whether you know about this matter. Ribbentrop maintains that when he heard about the order to brand Russian prisoners of war, he, in his capacity as Reich Foreign Minister, went immediately to the Führer’s headquarters to inform General Field Marshal Keitel of this order, and pointed out to him that he, Ribbentrop, in his capacity as Foreign Minister, as well as in his capacity as the guarantor of international law, objected to such treatment of Russian prisoners of war.

      I would be interested to know, Witness, whether in your circle something was said as to who drew Keitel’s attention to this order and asked him to retract it?

      LAHOUSEN: I was not informed of that and I only knew, as I said yesterday, that there had been this intention, but it was not carried out.

      DR. SAUTER: Then I have another question.

      Witness, you spoke yesterday about some remarks of the Defendant Ribbentrop, especially one statement to the effect that an uprising should be staged in Poland—not in Russia—and that all Polish farm houses should go up in flames and all Jews should be killed. That, roughly, was how the statement ran.

      LAHOUSEN: Yes.

      DR. SAUTER: Now, later on, I believe, in answering a question of one of the Russian prosecutors, you amplified your statement by mentioning an order of the Defendant Ribbentrop. I would now like to know whether you really meant to say that it was an order from Ribbentrop to a military department?

      LAHOUSEN: No.

      DR. SAUTER: Just a minute please, so that you can answer both questions together.

      I would also like to remind you that yesterday, when this matter was first discussed, you spoke of a directive which, I believe, your superior officer had, as you said, received from Ribbentrop?

      LAHOUSEN: No, the Chief of the OKW received it, not my superior officer, who was Canaris. I would like to repeat it, in order to clarify this matter. It was a matter that came up for discussion on the 12th of September 1939 in the Führer’s train. These meetings took place in the following sequence with respect to time and locality: At first a short meeting took place between the Reich Foreign Minister Ribbentrop and Canaris in his coach.

      DR. SAUTER: Were you present?

      LAHOUSEN: I was present at that meeting. General political questions regarding Poland and the Ukrainians in Poland were discussed. I do not know anything more about this meeting, which was the first.

      After that there was another meeting in the coach of Keitel, who was then Chief of the OKW, and in the course of this meeting Keitel summarized and commented on the general political directives issued by Ribbentrop. He then mentioned several possible solutions for the handling of the Polish problem from the point of view of foreign policy—this can happen, or something else can happen; it is quite possible. In this connection he said:

      “You, Canaris, have to promote an uprising with the aid of the Ukrainian organizations which are working with you and which have the same objectives, namely, the Poles and the Jews.”

      And then a third discussion, or rather, a very brief remark at the end of a very short conversation between the Foreign Minister Ribbentrop and Canaris was made in connection with this subject, after the intention had been made quite clear. It was about how the uprising was to be carried out and what was to happen. I remember this so well, because he demanded that the farm houses must burn. Canaris discussed the matter with me in detail later on and referred to this remark.

      That is what happened, as I have described it. This was the sequence: Directives from the High Command to Keitel; then passed on by Keitel to Canaris at this meeting; then repeated to Canaris in the form of a remark which I remember so well because it contained the words about farm houses in flames, which is rather an unusual thing to say.

      THE PRESIDENT: It would assist the Tribunal if one question at a time were asked and if the witnesses would answer “yes” or “no” to the question asked, and explain, if they must, afterwards. But questions and answers should be put as shortly as possible and only one question should be asked at a time.

      DR. SAUTER: Now, witness, something else has struck me.

      THE PRESIDENT: You heard what I said did you? Do you understand it?

      DR. SAUTER: [Continuing.] Yesterday you said that these remarks of Ribbentrop are not in the diary, if I understood you correctly.

      LAHOUSEN: No, this is not from the diary but has a connection with Canaris’ diary, by means of which I can make this remark.

      DR. SAUTER: You said yesterday that this remark struck you as being rather surprising.

      LAHOUSEN: Yes.

      DR. SAUTER: And today you said that General Blaskowitz also made some striking statements. You also mentioned, however, that these statements СКАЧАТЬ