These persons were not to be shot by the Ustasha immediately, as had originally been intended.
Q. I beg pardon, Herr von Besser. So that we have no misunderstanding here, who was it who intended to have these people quickly shot by the Ustasha?
A. The Ustasha had arrested these people in BanjaLuka, and wanted to make a brief job of the whole thing. General von Leyser protested against this, and demanded that these arrested be put before a German Summary Court Martial, and that they be sentenced by a German Summary Court Martial.
Q. Do you know any details, witness, about the carrying out of this Court Martial procedure, and about the sentence which was reached?
A. I was at that time the only legal man on the staff. General von Leyser therefore issued the order to report orally, to him on the constallation of any summary court martial. I did that and General von Leyser told me in this connection that in no event would he sign a verdict as judicial authority of the area which would not be quite clear in legal and factual respect. He did not want to expose himself to any later difficulties, as he expressed himself. Today I can no longer recall exactly what the results of this Court Martial procedure were, but I can say with certainty that no death sentence was arrived at. General von Leyser, after the Court Martial procedure, expressed his satisfaction with the verdict of the summary court martial, alone for having proved to the Croatians that he could not receive the instructions from them concerning such a procedure.
Q. Witness, if I understood you correctly, you said that the Court Martial procedure was carried out because these people were accused of owning weapons without permission. Can you tell us whether at that time in Banja-Luka it was forbidden to own weapons, what were the reasons for such directives and what punishment was provided in regard to this, if you know?
A. I don't know anything about that.
Q. You further said that General von Leyser was the judicial authority of the area; why did he in that particular case have judicial authority over the area?
A. That was because a state of emergency had been declared in the area at that particular time.
Q. May I understand your answer to the effect that otherwise General von Leyser would not have been the judicial authority?
A. That is quite correct. Otherwise in any other circumstances he was not the judicial authority and we had no summary court martial with the corps staff.
Q. You told us that General von Leyser demanded that a Ustasha leader be replaced because he was going to take to stringent measures against the civilian population. This seems to show that General von Leyser was concerned with the welfare of the civilian population, making, as he did complaints against a representative to the Croatian stale; can you tell us whether this care for the civilian population was also expressed at any other occasion?
A. Yes, there are some other cases which I remember. For instance, in Knin we put air raid shelters at the disposal of the population. Knin was at that time repeatedly attacked by the allied air force. The population, without exception, had to suffer under these attacks, particularly, since they had no adequate means of shelter. General von Leyser put shelters at their disposal, which partly were Wehrmacht shelters, and later on he had special shelters constructed by a pioneer staff, which was stationed near Knin. Furthermore, I remember that in Knin, on his order, great medical care was taken for the population. I have repeatedly visited a German Military Hospital which ms located in a school building outside Knin.
In this hospital indigenous people were also treated, and above all those people whose health had suffered in the ethnic conflict. A further measure which showed the care of the General, I would like to mention the salt transports which we carried out from the Isle of Rhab to the surroundings of Knin. The Croatians did not give any salt to the population, but the distribution of salt was an immediate necessity, because salt was extremely necessary for human consumption as well as for the feeding of the cattle.
DR. TIPP: Your Honor, this brings me to a new chapter. Might I personally suggest we take a recess now?
THE PRESIDENT: Let's keep going for two or three or four minutes. Let's keep going.
Q. Witness, did you have an opportunity to gain any insight in the internal situation of Croatia?
A. Through my long stay in Croatia, and through the frequent trips which I made with General von Leyser I believe I am in a position to give a statement on the internal situation in Croatia. Croatia, was at the time an independent and allied state, whose sovereignty was respected by the German Armed forces in every respect. For this reason we had Croatian liaison offices with our staff and representatives of the Croatian Government. These plenipotentiary representatives discussed all measures with us and we with them, inasmuch as they demanded interference with internal Croatian conditions. For instance, Minister Benac was with the staff of the 15th Mountain Corps in Banja-Luka. During our stay in Knin it was a Ustasha colonel, whose name I do not remember. All I know is he had been at Staff Headquarters in Benkovic near Zara. Next to these constant liaison offices the Croatian Government on special occasions was asked to sent special Plenipotentiaries. Thus it happened that amongst others the minister for the damaged districts, the Minister of the Interior and Foreign Minister came to Banja-Luka to visit us on several occasions.
General von Leyser immediately after he took over command of the office corps in Croatia went to see the Peglavnic, and he further visited the War Ministry and other high ranking personalities in Zagreb at that time. There was a constant good social relationship between him, the Minister Benac, and later in Sarajewo, he entertained the same relationship with Minister Sekovic. Before he left Croatia General von Leyser reported to the Croatian head of the state and he also paid a farewell visit to the War Minister and to the Chief of Croatian General Staff, etc.
THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn at this time until 9:30 tomorrow morning.
(Thereupon an adjournment was taken until 9:30 a.m., November 18, 1947.)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America against Wilhelm List, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 18 November 1947, 0930, Justice Carter presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal V. Military Tribunal V is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal. There will be order in the courtroom.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, will you ascertain if all the defendants are present in the courtroom?
THE MARSHAL: May it please your Honor, all defendants are present in the courtroom except the defendant von Weichs who is absent due to medical reasons.
THE PRESIDENT: Judge Carter will preside at this day's session.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: You may proceed.
HANS JOACHIM von BESSER - Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION - Continued BY DR. TIPP (Counsel for defendant von Leyser):
Q. Herr von Besser, yesterday we had stopped when we discussed the inner-Croatian conditions and the last thing you described to us was the way the conditions were in the administrative sphere and what General von Leyser did in order to reach a good relationship with the Croatian authorities.
One additional question: Can you tell us whether in the Corps area there was a Croatian civilian administration?
A. Yes, there was a net of Croatian agencies all over the country.
Q. And then to another set of questions: can you, from your personal observations of the conditions, tell us something about the ethnic conflict in Croatia and how this influenced the inner Croatian conditions?
A. The political, national and religious contrasts in Croatia were the strongest in all Europe, I believe.
Q. Can you briefly sketch for us what opposing groups faced each other in this area?
A. In contrasts consisted on the one hand between the Croatian and Serbian element. This was expressed in the fighting between the Ustasha and the Cetniks. Then there were serious contrasts between the Ustasha and the Moslems and, finally, there were the contrasts between the Cetniks and the Communists who were the partisans.
Q. I believe the ethnic struggle in Croatia has been discussed in the courtroom so frequently that these indications which you gave us are sufficient. Can you now tell us whether the corps took any measures caused by General von Leyser in order to mitigate the effect of this Ethnic fighting? Please do not make too general statements but rather give us one or two particular examples.
A. I can give you a few examples from my own experience. Where the fights between the Ustasha and the Cetniks are concerned, I remember one incident which took place in 1945 in Sarajevo. At that time near Sarajevo a German hospital train had been stopped by the Ustasha. In this German hospital train there were wounded Cetniks who were looked after by German medical men in this hospital train. Against the protests of the German medical personnel these Cetniks were taken from the train and shot. General von Leyser investigated immediately this incident and issued a strict order to the German troops to the effect that in the future every German soldier had to expect a court martial procedure who would not use his weapons and his guns to protect those wounded in his camp.
Q. That was an example, then, for the differences between the Ustasha and the Cetnik troops. Is it perhaps possible for you to give us another example from another sector of the Ethnic fighting?
A. A further incident which took place illuminates the contrast between the Ustasha and the Moslems. Shortly before our staff left Sarajevo in the spring of 1945 in the City Park of Sarajevo a number of hostages had been hanged by the Ustasha. Amongst these hostages were a number of important personalities of the Moslem group and all hostages which had been hanged wore posters around their neck and these posters were also exhibited on the official posters in the town.
It could be read there that these measures were carried out by the Croatian authorities in agreement with the German Armed Forces. Immediately after this incident became known General von Leyser ordered that Minister Lorkovic be phoned up.
General von Leyser, in the discussion which followed blamed the Ustasha for this procedure and, above all, he protested against the statement that the German Armed Forces had taken any part in these measures. He insisted that immediately the Croatians issue a dementi stating that these measures were exclusively ordered by the Croatians and that the German troops had not known anything of this measure before it was carried out.
Furthermore, General von Leyser demanded a thorough investigation of the incident and protested against future occurrences of this kind which, in the final analysis, would be bad for the account of the German Armed Forces.
Q. If I understood you correctly, Herr von Besser, the hanging of these hostages was a measure taken by the Ustasha.
A. Yes, it was purely a measure taken by the Ustasha.
Q. You told us a few things, Herr von Besser, about the contrast which existed between the Ustasha and the Cetniks, between the Ustasha and the Moslems; you also told us that General von Leyser tried to do something against this and what he did against this. Could you possibly tell us something about how the differences between the Cetniks and the Communist Tito groups affected the conditions?
A. Here again I can describe a personal experience. As I have already mentioned, during a flight to Tirana our plant had to make an emergency landing. On this occasion we were taken prisoner by the Cetniks and every one us was in a position there to establish exactly how strong the contrast was between the Cetniks and the Partisans.
During the ten days which we spent there as prisoners not one single day passed were there wasn't suddenly an alarm because of advancing partisans and this alarm was given in this small camp in which we stayed. Every time there was a terrible panic amongst the Cetniks and this only calmed down when it was established that there was no reason for the alarm.
One day again there was such an alarm and the Cetniks left the camp in a hurry and took us along. After a march of about one hour we stopped and after a further hour we went back to the old quarters because the partisans allegedly took off again. After our return we found out that the luggage which we had left behind had been stolen in the meantime. Fortunately, we had taken our arms along and, above all, the machine guns from the airplanes, because the partisans were particularly keen on these instruments.
Q. In this connection I would like to ask you to clear up a discrepancy for us, Herr von Besser. You said that you were the prisoner of this Cetnik group. On the other hand, you tell us that you had your arms on you and with you. Isn't that a contraditions? Can you clarify it?
A. I see no contradition in this. Undoubtedly, our states was that of prisoners. At least, we were not actually at liberty. Apart from the fact that we were prevented from marching on to the North as we had wanted to, we were also taken along high up into the mountains. Furthermore, we were constantly accompanied by Cetniks. On the other hand, one has to consider the fact that it would not have been so very easy to take the arms from us which we had with us because, after all, we were 15 people and every one of us had his machine pistol with him which he would not give up. Apart from this, we also had the machine guns from the airplane.
Concerning this question, whether or not we were prisoners, we, of course, discussed this fact amongst others, with one doctor who was amongst the Cetniks. The Cetniks hastened every time to assure us that were were not prisoners and, in order to emphasize this thesis, they told us that if we actually had been prisoners of the Cetniks we would have long since, as they called it, been "liquidated."
They emphasized that we were guarded for our own protection and detained by them because of the partisans who were around in the neighborhood.
In actual fact, we all fully realized that the Cetniks were only interested in the General's person and we all presented some welcome hostages in their hand. The General and all of us could have possibly been handed over to the partisans by the Cetniks, for instance, as an exchange against important Cetnik prisoners who might have at that time been in the hands of partisans.
On the other hand, we represented a good means of pressure on the German troops because possibly we could be exchanged against weapons, munitions, medical equipment, et cetera. We all realized that we were prisoners.
Q General von Leyser, while on the witness stand, described his stay with the Cetniks in all details. Herr von Besser. I believe we can now conclude this particular problem.
I would only like to know from you how you managed to got back to the German troops after you were prisoner there.
A In captivity we had tried everything we possibly could to contact the German troops. For this purpose we had at the time asked one of our officers to go with a Cetnik in order to take up contact. Later on when we were freed we found out this officer, as could not be expected any differently, was completely led astray by this Cetnik. This officer was led around in circles for days and never did reach the German lines.
When the 1st Mountain Division or, rather, the last remnants of this division gathered together in the Serbian area they were committed along the River Drina in order to represent a protection of the flank against the East. When these units advanced from the North suddenly the Cetniks informed us of this fact and told us that, because our own troops were approaching at this point, the partisans who were around in the neighborhood had suddenly withdrawn and, therefore, our way was suddenly clear.
Then one day we were put on a truck, after we had been led down to the valley, and this truck took us to Vigadina where the Division Staff of the 1st Division was stationed.
Q One last question which I would like to put to you, witness; the collaboration between the German Armed Forces, the SS and the SD plays an important part in these proceedings. Can you from your own personal knowledge of General von Leyser tell us anything about whether he was on good terms with any of the leading personalities of the SS and Croatia and Albania, or any personal contact or any official contact? Under the leading personalities of the SS I would like you to understand the representative of the Reichsfuehrer SS in Croatia and the representative of the Reichsfuehrer SS in Albania, SS Gruppenfuehrer Fitzthum.
Are you in a position to tell us anything about this, Herr von Besser?
A I must say that in the Croatian area General von Leyser had no personal contact with the agencies of the SS nor did he have any personal contact with the SD. On the contrary, he rejected all these people according to his innermost opinion and attitude.
Where Albania was concerned, where at first I was not his A.D.C., I can only say that there, too, I did not see anything like a collaboration.
DR. TIPP: May it please the Tribunal, I have at the moment no further questions to put to Herr von Besser.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: You may cross examine the witness.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. FULKERSON:
Q Herr von Besser, I believe you executed an affidavit for Dr. Tipp on the 17th of October. Is that right?
DR. TIPP: May it please the Tribunal, I object to this question as a precautionary measure because this affidavit was never introduced by me. It is not a subject in this procedure and it has not been made a subject of direct examination by me.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: I think the question is proper. The objection is overruled.
A I have executed one affidavit.
Q In which you set out a good deal of what your testimony here for the last day has been.
A Yes. That is right.
Q I was particularly struck by the fluency with which you were able to answer Dr. Tipp's questions. Would you mind telling me this: were you testifying spontaneously or were you on an occasion reading from a prefabricated script that you had already prepared?
A For the testimony which I have made here I did not read from anything.
Q I notice you produced a sheet pf notes from your pocket when you first began to testify and that you seemed to refer to them rather closely as you went along.
A It is true that I made a few notes just to support my memory.
Q Do you have any objection to me seeing the notes?
DR. TIPP: May it please the Tribunal, that has not been customary here at all, that the prosecutor wanted to see these notes. I assume that Herr von Besser has no objection to the prosecutor seeing these notes but it has not so far been customary in this proceeding. He may ask whether the witness has made any notes and the witness has answered this question in the affirmative. The prosecutor has further asked what kind of notes they were and this question has been answered, too. I do not believe the prosecutor has a right to look at these notes which the witness has made, as he said, to support his memory.
The witness is under oath. He has to be responsible for what he says and how he says it and I believe a further clarification of this point is no longer necessary. I, therefore, object to this way of questioning.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: The objection is overruled.
Q Do you have any objection to my looking at the notes personally?
A Yes, certainly, go ahead.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. TIPP:
Q Herr Kobe, before we start this examination, following up an incident which occurred during the examination of Herr von Besser, I would like to put a few questions to you.
A Please go ahead.
Q First of all, will you please tell the Tribunal how you came to appear as a witness here for General von Leyser?
A I read in the newspaper that my former commanding general, General von Leyser, had been accused of war crimes, and later from a comrade I learned that certains matters were concerned here also which took place in Croatia. Since I myself realized that everything was in order down there I thought that I should have to report myself in order to discuss and clarify certain problems of importance here, at least where my divisional area was concerned. For this purpose I obtained your address here, Dr. Tipp, and I wrote to you and gave you a general survey. Consequently you contacted me, and the correspondence which followed led to the fact that I was called here as a witness.
Q Before your being examined here did we discuss all the matters to become subject of this examination?
A Yes, we discussed all these problems.
Q Did I, on that occasion, suggest or dictate any answers to you?
A No, the answers which I intend to give are based on the pure truth only. That is a matter of course. After all, I am under oath here.
Q In preparation for your examination did you make any notes, Herr Kobe?
DR. SAUTER: Dr. Sauter for the Defendants Lanz and von Geitner.
May it please the Tribunal, I would like the Tribunal's attention for just a few moments...
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: You have it, Dr. Sauter.
DR. SAUTER: Because this is a question of fundamental importance.
Up to this date in the proceedings which have been held here before the International Military Tribunal and before the American Tribunals it was not customary for the Prosecution to ask to have a look at the notes which a witness has made for himself. Of course I completely comply with the ruling of the Tribunal without, in any way, criticizing it. I am obliged, as a German defense counsel, to point out the danger of this procedure by the Prosecution. During the days of the International Military Tribunal, and during the trials before the American Tribunals, we were repeatedly told that the Defense should maintain exactly the same position as does the Prosecution, but up to this date I have never seen that a German defense counsel considered it correct or tactful to ask, here in the Courtroom, to look at notes made by a witness of the Prosecution. I am convinced that no representative of the Prosecution would have agreed to us defense counsel's looking at notes and papers of an incriminating witness. The Tribunal has made a ruling for this particular, specific case, but I have to point out the consequences of this ruling because we defense counsel find the Defense extremely difficult. In future cases we would have to assume that the Tribunal consent to the Prosecution's looking at all notes here in the Courtroom of a witness called by us. I believe this makes our defense extremely difficult, and, if what took place here just now becomes known in public, and if every witness called as Defense witness to this witness-stand has to count on a repetition of this, or on the fact that he had to show everything which he has in his pockets to the Prosecution so that they might check up on it, this will make it, for all practical purposes, impossible for us to get one more future witness to Nurnberg or to get an affidavit from any further witness. I take the liberty, Your Honors, to point out these consequences. They are very serious.
MR. FULKERSEN: May I say a word, if Your Honors please?
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: I don't think it's necessary. In answer to what Dr. Sauter has said, the ruling of the Court is based on the proposition that when a witness uses notes, that is a privilege that we have accorded him, but on cross-examination the Prosecution has the right to find out the nature of those notes.
It goes to the credibility of his evidence and to the credibility of the witness also. The ruling doesn't mean that if he has some paper in his pockets that he hasn't used the Prosecution can compel him to produce it. That is the effect of the ruling. Notes and papers used by the witness to refresh his memory can be requested by the Prosecution. The objection will be overruled.
JUDGE BURKE: There's one member of the Tribunal who does not agree. I beg to disagree with that ruling, and I wish the record to show it.
DR. SAUTER: May it please the Tribunal, I do not want to delay the continuity of this proceeding, but may I put one question to the Tribunal? Does this point of view, which has been expressed here, apply only to the Prosecution, or does it also apply to the Defense? In other words, what interests me, and I believe also my colleagues, is the following question: If a witness of the Prosecution appears here am I also entitled, with the consent of the Tribunal, to ask him to produce such notes in this Courtroom as he may have made for the Prosecution, so that I or my colleagues might check these notes and make them subject of future actions against anybody--possibly against the witness? Or does this ruling apply only to the Prosecution? In that case I believe my colleagues and I would like to know the ruling for future instances.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: The ruling applies both ways. If the Prosecution witness uses notes you are entitled to inspect them and interrogate about the source of his knowledge, whether he's reading something or if he is testifying from his own memory. That's a matter which applies to the Defense just the same as to the Prosecution.
DR. SAUTER: Your Honor,...
JUDGE BURKE: Just a moment. The Prosecution's case apparently has been concluded.
DR. SAUTER: I shall not omit, in every single instance where the Prosecution might call any future witness, to cause the witness, in the same manner as has been done here, to produce his notes. Also, in future trials I shall use this ruling of the Tribunal as an example.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: You may proceed, Mr. Fulkersen.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. FULKERSEN:
Q I notice here only Pages 13 through 18. Did you have twelve additional pages, twelve pages that you used yesterday which you didn't bring here today?
A I haven't them on me.
Q Would you mind later on in the day getting those other twelve pages and letting me have them please?
A I don't see any reason for this.
Q Then you object to producing the other twelve pages?
A Yes, I object to that.
Q Why?
A I personally feel--I would like to put it this way--that this is a criticism of my person. If my words are not believed that these notes merely are intended to support my memory, doubtlessly in order to bring a certain continuity to my testimony, I could have done without these notes because I had sufficient time to think about the problems and about the notes, and I assure you I would not have needed the notes. I, as a legal man, would show up pretty poorly were I not in a position to say in a logical sequence, without these notes, such as I put it down in these notes in a dialectical sense here. Furthermore, the Prosecutor has sufficient opportunity to cross-examine to check whether or not I am in a position to answer all those questions which he intends to put to me quickly, logically, and fluently.
Q But the Prosecution is not in a position to see whether you were, in fact, testifying spontaneously or whether you were just reading a script of questions and answer that you had prepared before you came in Court, unless you give us what you were reading from.
Then, you still object to letting us have that?
A I still object.
Q I have no further questions, Your Honor.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: Any further questions by counsel for the Defense?
DR. TIPP: Dr. Tipp, Your Honor.
RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. TIPP:
Q I have one question to put to you, Herr von Besser, and it is the following: Were the questions--to put it better--were the answers which you gave here dictated to you by me?
A I, as a legal man, am completely aware of the meaning, first of all, of an affidavit, and I am also fully aware what it means to me to give testimony on the witness-stand on oath before this Tribunal, which is all in public. It's, therefore, to me a matter of course even assuming that I would have read these things from prepared notes, that I did not speak under any pressure or under any leading questions of the Prosecution, or even worse that they had been dictated to me.
Q I have no further questions.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: The notes that you have taken from the witness should be returned to him now. (THE PROSECUTION RETURNS NOTES IN QUESTION TO WITNESS) Are there any further questions?
If not, the witness will be excused.
(WITNESS HANS JOACHIM von BESSER WAS EXCUSED)
DR. TIPP: I would like to call the next witness for General von Leyser, the Witness Gert Kobe.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: The Marshall will call the witness.
(GERT KOBE, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:)
You will raise your right hand and be sworn. I swear by God, the Almighty and Omiscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(THE WITNESS REPEATED THE OATH.)
You may be seated.
A Yes, I made some notes in order to support my memory.
Q Is it necessary that you use these notes during your examination?
A No, not necessarily, but it would be a little better because then the examination could continue clearly and logically.
Q Do you have any misgivings that these notes are given to the Prosecutor after your examination?
A No, none.
Q Then, after we have cleared this formal question I would like to start with the factual examination. The Tribunal knows who you are, witness, but I would like you to give us, again for the record, your first name and surname.
A. My name is Gert Kobe.
Q. Will you please spell your surname?
A. (SPELLING) K-0-B-E.
Q. I would like to ask you to pause a little longer between question and answer.
When and where were you born?
A. I was born on the 28th of February 1914 in Bettingen near Wertheim on the Main River.
Q. Please give us your present address.
A. My present address is Domaene Lune near Rothenburg, Hannover.
Q. What is your profession at the moment?
A. I am a farming trainee.
Q. And what was your former profession?
A. I was a professional officer.
Q. What was your last rank in the Armed Forces?
A. I was a Lieutenant Colonel in the General Staff.
Q. A little slower please. Make a longer pause.
Were you a member of the Party or any of its formations?
A. No.
Q. Please give the Tribunal a brief outline of your military career.
A. On the 1st of April 1932 I entered the Reichswehr as an officer candidate. After I had been to the military academy, on the 1st of October 1934, I became an officer. On the 1st of September 1939 with my active regiment, of which I was Company Chief, I entered the war, and I participated as such in the Polish campaign. During the French campaign I was regimental adjutant in the same regiment, and soon afterwards I became aide-de-camp to the 50th Division. With this unit I participated in the Greek campaign and in 1941 I participated in the first part of the Russian campaign. Towards New Year of 1942 I became Battalion Commander in my old regiment. Soon after that, however, in the spring, I was called to Berlin to the training course for General Staff Officers. After that I became Ib of the 383d Division, which was stationed between Kursk and Orel in Russia.
As Ib I had to deal with the supplies of my division. In November, 1942 I became the leader of the Courrier Air Liaison, and I was transferred as such to the OKH. After about four or five months I was made Ia of the Xth Army Corps near Lake Ilmen in Russia. When the Russians advanced an army group was organized in order to prevent this advance, which became a break through eventually and I was made Ia of this army group. After we had solved the task assigned to the army group was dissolved in December, 1943. I, was called to the 392nd Division as Ia, which was just about to be organized.
Q. Could you tell us please, witness, where this division was organized?
A. In Doellersheim near Vienna.
Q. You told us you were made Ia of this division. How long did you remain in that position?
A. Until about the 11th of March 1945.
Q. Would you briefly tell the Tribunal what your further assignments were during the war?
A. I then became leave representative of the Iaf, who is assistant of the Ia in the Staff of the Commander in Chief West. I was there when the war ended.
Q. You were taken prisoner of war, Herr Kobe?
A. Yes, after the troops were demobilized -- I believe at the beginning of July, 1945.
Q. And in the meantime you have been released from capivity?
A. Yes, on the 4th of December we were dismissed.
Q. We will now return to the subject of your testimony. There are a few questions which I would like to put to you concerning the position of a Ia with a division. First of all, will you tell us briefly what are the tasks of the Ia for a division.
A. A divisional Ia is mainly a tactical assistant to the divisional commander. Furthermore he has to deal with the position of the enemy, and the Ic helped him in this.