Now, as far as the Rosenberg detachment worked in that direction, as I explain now, we had confiscation on behalf of the state, because what the occupying power is doing here, you would not call plundering. I did not see it that way. Quite aside from the fact was that I did not know the detachment or what the task of the Rosenberg detachment was, I saw that in the documents offered and from the various questions in the course of the trial. I knew Rosenberg's name and knew he wrote this crazy book, "The Myth of the 20th Century," I believe it is called and that is about all.
Q Well, in this case, the decisive factor was the fact that factual orders had been issued to this detachment by a Higher Agency to search various archives. Were you in any way connected with these factual orders, irrespective of whether you regarded them as proper or improper, as expedient or non-expedient, did they have anything to do with the disciplinary power?
AApart from the fact that I did not know anything at all or did not hear about it until later, this had nothing to do with the disciplinary command in Greece.
Q General, this brings me to a different chapter. I think there is one point which has not been made quite clear by you. You were discussing a report by the LXVIII Army Corps where units were mentioned which were not subordinate to the LXVIII Corps as it happened frequently; in this case it was the SS Regiment XVIII. Quite generally, I would like to ask you once again when the report by the LXVIII Army Corps or the war diary some units are mentioned expressly by name, then it was clear whether or not it was subordinate to you, anybody who knew the conditions would realize that. And it would become clear from the organization or arrangement, if it was the 117th Division or the 11th Luftwaffe Field division or any other battalion belonging to the division, a connection existed. On the other hand, if an SS unit was mentioned explicitly, which was not subordinate to the LXVII Corps, then I think it was equally clear and if a unit was not mentioned, but only some occurrence, what about that?
A Well, then it was unclear, but we had to report it all the same to Higher Quarters, because the Army Group was interested in all incidents.
Q It was unclear you mean?
A That this unit was not subordinate to the Corps.
Q A question about the volunteer units, on Friday, General, or some day last week you said on direct examination that Colonel Papadongeas was subordinate to the Greek Ministry of the Interior. Could you order him to take, or carry out, or order any reprisal measures, could you order him to shoot 100 reprisal prisoners, or were you not entitled to do that?
A I was not entitled to do that. He regarded himself as an independent agency. We cooperated for tactical purposes, that is we informed him when we went out against a guerilla operation and he informed us when he attempted to do something, so that we could adjust our operation and help each other.
Q. Now, General, this brings me to the two opinions given for General Lesuire, which were submitted on cross-examination, let me ask you first of all what are these opinions, there is one of 1 March 1944 and the other is dated 16 July 1944?
A. May I look at this document once again? The prosecution asked me whether I had suggested that General LeSuire be promoted and I answered "no" and I can prove that. In this efficiency report I gave about the General, on 1 March 1944, which is the sort of annual efficiency report which we used to issue once a year, it says there among other things that he should be left where he was. In the opinion of 16 July, 1944, it says "command of a mountain corps". That was caused, as the documents prove, because, on 10 July, in other words, roughly three months after the opinion came in March, the commander of the 117th Division had been transferred to the officers reserve of the High Command of the Army without my having done anything about it. That was an indication of the fact that he should have asked to be used elsewhere and now on the basis of that transfer to the officer's reserve, I gave what we call the final opinion on 16 July, as he had been transferred to the officers' reserve, I suggested him to be the Commander of a mountain corps, that is not a promotion, a promotion would have been if I had written and suggested that he become a General of the mountain troops. Had he been in a Panzer action, I would have said commander of a Panzer corps.
You had two possibilities, let me say, to suggest somebody for promotion. One was promotion out of turn. If some officer or other had acquired special merits, be it in the field of technique of commanding troops or had he distinguished himself particularly in an engagement, then independent of what I said in March, I could suggest for the reasons mentioned that he either be given a decoration or promoted out of turn.
The second possibility was given in the regular annual opinion, which became due in March. Then under the opinion of 1 March 1944, I would have to insert or suggest that he be promoted to the next rank, which is not the case. I described his personal and soldierly qualifications both in March and in July, but I did not suggest that he be promoted.
That he was transferred to the officers reserve in July, having commanded the division for more than a year, because the 117th division had been put in his charge on 10 March, 1943 and on 10 July, 1944 he had been in charge for one year and three months, and therefore it seems natural for him to be used elsewhere. Losses among Generals in the east forced us to use younger men and then on 5 August, according to the documents, he was entrusted with the command of a Mountain Corps, but it was not until 1 October, 1944 when he was promoted commanding general, having left me three months ago. I don't know if there are any more questions with regard to this order or if I have been sufficiently clear.
Q. There is only one more point, General, you say that you had not suggested his promotion, the commander of a mountain corps was not a higher rank, but only a higher position, as compared to the division commander. When General von LeSuire went to the officers reserve on 10 July 1944, did you realize what that meant at that moment?
A. As he had not been given a bad record sheet militarily because there was no reason to do so for military reasons, I expected that in the near future he would be put in charge of a corps.
Q. Were you of the opinion that this transfer to the officers' reserve was the prelude for this; was it usual in the German Wehrmacht?
A. Yes, I expected this, and it was usual.
Q. Your remark, "commander of a Mountain corps" in the second opinion, was that in any way the cause for General von LeSuire being entrusted with the command of a Mountain corps as from 5 August, 1944, or were the two things independent of one another in your opinion?
A. There might have been a connection of cause and effect, but secondly, the personnel office need not have observed too strictly the recommendations coming from me, but it seems relatively logical, he had experience in our mountain troops, and it was logical for him to take over a mountain corps if he was to be used as a soldier at the front.
Q. Was your opinion rendered at a later time than his transfer to the officers' reserve?
A. True.
Q. Then this transfer to the officers' reserve seemed to make it proper that he had been car-marked for something else, namely as commanding general for a mountain corps?
A. Yes, that could be assumed with almost 100% certainty.
Q. Then very briefly, I would like to mention the magic term N.S.; what is the significance of that, General? Did you on your own initiative include it in your opinion and thereby mean to say that he had been a convinced or even a fanatical National Socialist or was that a regulation?
A. That was according to regulations in the case of the Luftwaffe, and I am in a position to judge that there was a regulation in peace time too, to include a remark of that sort when this applied to the army, I don't know. It meant that the man concerned was at least not prejudiced against the state and its institutions. Had I written "an enthusiastic National Socialist," one could have intensified the term, but, as it stood, it was merely a remark which was in accordance with regulations.
Q. It did not have the meaning that the man was a particularly enthusiastic National Socialist, it was a mere formality where you need not have any special idea. Was that a general custom?
A. It was a formality, which had to be fulfilled without any ulterior motives. Had I inserted he is not a National Socialist, then it would have meant the end of his career. People at least would have seen that his attitude was at least a hostile one toward the National Socialist State and in all fairness, that could be expected of the people so that they would not take an attitude against him at least particularly not in the officers corps.
Q. This remark was not made by you on your own initiative and particularly was not connected with the fact that you were a member of the party?
A. No, not at all. My membership in the party was resting while I was in the army, these two facts were not connected with each other at all.
Q. I did not mean the formal act of membership, but your political opinion?
A. I see what you mean; I had no private connections to a higher party agency.
Q. You said just now, General, the fact that you had been a member of the party had been in abeyance while you were a member of the Wehrmacht?
A. Yes.
Q. How long were you than a member of the party for practical purposes?
A. If you take the date of my application as the date of my entry, I was in the party from October of 1940 until May , 1941.
Q. General, I have one more question which is connected with this morning's cross-examination. You said that these reprisal measures which had been carried out in the area of the LXVIII Corps had been necessary with the exception of Kalavrita, militarily speaking, and may I add here first that you also described Distemen as an excess; Kalavrita and Distomen you described as militarily not necessary?
A. In the case of Kalavrita at least there was some reason, namely the murder of 78 German soldiers. In the case of Distomen there was not reason at all, as we found out later.
Q. Well, this was only in anticipation, but I would like to ask you this; you said in the area of the LXVIII Army Corps it was necessary, did you want to include all these measures as well which had been ordered and caused by other agencies, which although stationed in your area were not subordinate to you, or did you not want to include these?
A. I cannot give you an opinion about the others, I wanted to say those carried out by units of the LXVIII Corps.
Q. I have no further questions.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: Are there any questions by other defense counsel? The prosecution?
RECROSS ELIMINATION BY MR. FEMSTERMACHER:
Q. General Felmy, during the period you were Field Marshal List's deputy, if you had opposed reprisal measures which had taken place in Serbia during that period, could you have intervened and prevented them?
A. I did not hear about them; at least, I do not recall them. Therefore, I cannot answer that question.
Q. If you had heard about them. you as Deputy would have had full power to intervene, would you not?
A. This is one of those hypothetical questions which it is so difficult to reconstruct now; in other words,"would I have done, did I not, would I have?"
Q. This only concerns your powers as deputy. I am asking you did you have the power as deputy to intervene?
A. Of course, the deputy had the authority, had the same authority as the original holder of the office. I was deputy judicial authority, for instance, and as such I had the same authority as had Field Marshal List.
Q. Now as a matter of fact, you never worried about the lawfulness of orders you received from OKW, did you? When you got orders you simply obeyed them.
A. The lawfulness, as it is now being doubted here, is being discussed here, I never worried about, I can say with a clear conscience.
Q. Did you ever hear about the Rosenberg units being particularly concerned with looking for Jewish literature and Jewish works of art in various libraries and archives in the occupied territories?
A. No, all I heard was that they wanted to inform themselves about Free Mason lodges.
They were not only Jewish matters, because Free Masons are not only Jewish organizations.
Q. Now, with regard to your disciplinary powers over the Rosenberg units, if you had considered the activities of any of those units criminal or unlawful, you would have had power to intervene and court-martial the perpetrators, would you not?
A. The Rosenberg detachment -- all I know was that there were five or ten men under one Lieutenant and I heard nothing of any looting on their part in the sense which I define plundering just now relatively clearly.
Q. That is not quite what I asked you, General Felmy. I asked you whether or not you could have court martialed the perpetrators of any activities by members of the Rosenberg units if you had considered their activities unlawful. Did you have the power to courtmartial because you had disciplinary power?
A. Disciplinary power does not always entail a judicial authority. I could take steps against any member of the army, the Luftwaffe or the navy in my position as Commander in Chief Southern Greece only in a disciplinary sense -- that is to say, I could give them "confined to barracks", for instance, but if any judicial measures became necessary those measures were initiated by the field courts of the air force, the navy or the army.
Q. You mean you did not have the power to court-martial a Rosenberg member by virtue of your disciplinary power of the Rosenberg units in your area?
A. No, I could only move that a member of the army, the navy or the air force for this or that reason should be put before a courtmartial which had nothing to do really with the Rosenberg detachment. It applied to any soldier.
Q. So the power of discipline over a non-Wehrmacht unit is not particularly important, General? The power of discipline does not include the power to court martial?
A. Not in the position held by the Commander in Chief Southern Greece. Some garrison regulation had always to be borne in mind in a somewhat complex affair. If I remember rightly, it said he hold disciplinary punitive powers such as is held by the Commander for a fortress in peacetime.
Q. Now, if the power of discipline over a non-Wehrmacht unit did not include the power to court-martial, then your lack of disciplinary power over the SS units was also not very important because there, too, it did not include the power to court-martial?
A. No, I couldn't.
Q. Perhaps, you didn't quite follow. I said that if you did not, if the power of discipline did not include the power of courtmartial, then the fact that you had no disciplinary power over the SS units was also not very important and the fact that you did not have disciplinary power over the SS units was not particularly important to you, was it?
A. I don't quite see what you mean quite frankly.
Q. Well, we'll let it go, General Felmy, and turn to another question. I don't suppose you happen to know where Colonel Papadongeas is at the present time?
A. The Greek military mission told me that during the December unrest, from December 1944 to January 1945, he was murdered by ELAS which I deeply regreted. He was a strong opponent of the ELAS and it seems entirely possible to me that this is true. A friend of mine wrote this to me. Of course, I had no personal contact with the Greek military mission in Berlin.
Q. Now, regarding the personnel file of General von LeSuire, when you stated on the 1st of March 1944 that it is suggested that he remain at his post you had in mind the fact that he had three months earlier committed an excess in the course of the Kalavrita operation, did you not?
A. That was less important because I explained why I did not report the Kalavrita incident and General LeSuire's connection with it to Higher Headquarters. I did not think it would be successful. I thought it would be more successful to tackle him personally by applying brakes to his energies, that he would first report largo scale reprisal measures to Corps and that, as he had been in charge of his division for only a year at that time, as I see it -- he started commanding the corps in June, when he joined me in the Peleponnesus, I believe, and that that opinion was the correct one was shown in the following period of time because the Kalavrita incident did not repeat itself.
There was nothing that you did to cause the transfer of LeSuire out of your corps area, was there?
A No.
Q On the 16th of July 1944 you stated that General LeSuire was suitable to command a mountain corps. Just three weeks after that, on the 5th of August 1944, he was assigned a corps.
A On the 10th of July, unless I am very much mistaken, he had been transferred to the officers' reserve. That meant he was about to be used elsewhere as from a purely military point of view no objections could be raised against his person. That means -- or at least you could interpret it to that effect -- that now that he had been in charge of the division for a certain period of time he could presumably be entrusted with the command of a corps.
Q In spite of the Kalavrita operation and other reprisal measures that LeSuire took as commander of the 117th Infantry Division, you felt he could be entrusted to command a larger number of troops than he did when he was under your command?
A I said before that I regarded Kalavrita as the excess although 78 German soldiers had been murdered before and I have given you my reason several times, that the other reprisal measures had been caused by the attitude taken by the population. We did not take them voluntarily or arbitrarily. We would have much preferred the population to have remained calm; then we need not have taken any reprisal measures. After all, you mustn't put conditions upside down here. The population had been incited by the British and committed acts of sabotage and we had to take reprisal measures thereupon. The reasons I have given you before.
Q On the 16th of July 1944 you felt that LeSuire could be entrusted with a corps, although previously he had been entrusted only with a division. Is that correct?
A Yes, that was the natural, the next step on the ladder.
Q This National Socialist regulation you talk about, General Felmy; when did that regulation become a part of army regulations, if you know?
A I said before that the Luftwaffe observed it in peacetime. I can say that with certainty because I was with the Luftwaffe at the time; but when it was introduced into army regulations I do not know.
Q You couldn't say whether it was 1943 or 1945?
A 1945? Certainly not, because then I would not have included it. Probably it came out in 1943 or 1944 -- a regulation to that effect, I mean.
Q You note that on the 30th of July 1944 Field Marshal Weichs does not include that statement. Do you suppose the regulation came out after the 30th of August 1944?
AAfter all, I included it on the 1st of March. Therefore, it cannot have been issued after the 30th of July. I having included it in the opinion, it was left to Field Marshal von Weichs whether or not he wanted to stress it once again or whether he wanted to say "not an N.S. officer." I had no influence on what Field Marshal von Weichs wanted to say in the opinion.
At any rate, that regulation must have been in existence on 1 March 1944 for the Army because otherwise I would not have had any reason to make this addition in the opinion but I don't know what the date was.
Q You believe that General Loehr and Field Marshal Weichs must have violated that regulation and not have it included in their statements regarding LeSuire?
A I did not say so, that they violated the regulation but, as it says in the basic opinion. I was the first to give an opinion as the commanding general for a divisional commander, the others could either say he is not a National Socialist officer or they need not do so. I don't know why they didn't. After all, it was said once and unless they deviated in their opinion they need not confirm it. They need not stress it particularly. Therefore, it should be assumed that they shared my opinion.
Q You couldn't join the Party while you were still an officer, could you, General, speaking now about the time prior to your dismissal in January 1940?
AActive officers were not allowed to become members of the Party. In 1945 a loosening up of this regulation is supposed to have happened but I am not aware of it personally.
Q When you were dismissed from the Wehrmacht and had an opportunity to join the party, you did so.
A I did not do so for reasons of opportunism. I explained my reasons. It was possible for a man who was not an active soldier to join the Party. That is quite correct.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I have no further questions, your Honors.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: Any further Questions for the defense?
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW (Counsel for defendant Felmy): May it please the Tribunal, I do not want to talk any more about the Rosenberg detachment because I assume that the Tribunal are now aware of the significance of this club which consisted of five archive experts who had been put into a uniform and I believe it is also quite clear what connection General Felmy had as a disciplinary authority towards that so-called detachment. I have no further questions to ask from General Felmy.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARRIER: Any Questions by the defense counsel? By the Tribunal?
JUDGE BURKE: I have no questions.
THE PRESIDENT: I have none.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: The witness will be excused.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: If the Tribunal please, I would now like to ask for two witnesses to be called who have given an affidavit which I was unable to submit because the affiants live in Nurnberg. With the Court's consent, I should like to call Dr. Guenther Altenburg.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: The marshal will call the witness.
(Guenther Altenburg, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:)
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: The witness will raise his right hand and be sworn.
I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW:
Q Will you please look at me, Dr. Altenburg? Please give me your full name?
A Guenther Altenburg. Do you want all my Christian names?
Q No, I think one is quite enough. When were you born?
A 5 June 1894 in Koenigsberg, Prussia.
Q Will you please speak a little more slowly and speak into the microphone? Where are you living now?
A I am in custody here in Nurnberg.
Q Why are you in custody?
A I am here as a witness for two trials: for the trial of the Southeast Generals and for the Foreign Ministry.
Q. Dr. Altenburg, you will recall that on 21 June of this year you gave me an affidavit for General Felmy who is one of the defendant in this trial.
A Yes, I did so.
Q I would like briefly to interrogate you on that affidavit. How do you know General Felmy?
A I know General Felmy from Greece when I was down there as a Minister and Plenipotentiary in Athens. I arrived there by the end of April 1941. General Felmy arrived shortly after me and became Commander in Chief South Greece. He remained for about one year and three months.
Q How long did you remain in Greece as a Minister?
A I remained until 3 November 1943 in Greece although the last six months before my transfer I was frequently absent from Athens.
Q Dr. Altenburg, you represented, as minister Plenipotentiary, the civilian sector at that time, did you not?
A I represented the political interests of the German Reich.
Q I see, and in that capacity you had frequent contact with the civilian population on the one hand and with German military agencies on the other. Is that correct?
A Yes, it is.
Q Now, I have this question to ask you: how did General Felmy act towards the Greek population?
A Both as far as the government was concerned and as far as private individuals were concerned, I never heard anything unfavorable about General Felmy as long as I was down there.
Q Excuse me one moment. Let me ask you another question first. Did you hear at any time during that period of time down in Greece that General Felmy had ordered any reprisal measures?
A When I was down there -- not.
Q Now, will you please tell us about his attitude, the attitude he took towards the Greek population?
A He demonstrated that he was interested in the needs and concerns of the population. For instance, the press attache of the legation would have to report to him from newspapers about what the population was interested in, how it concerned them, what the real needs of the population were. He was deeply interested in gifts of food, gifts of medical supplies. He took part in their distribution. These things were distributed by the commander-in-chief to the population. When complaints were made concerning requisition departments he showed a generous frame of mind. He was in a position to grant a number of alleviations which, of course, were received with gratitude.
Q. Do you mean to say that he complied with the wishes of the Greek population as much as he could?
A. That I can confirm.
Q. Dr. Altenburg, what opinion did you hear about General Felmy on the part of Greek individuals? Did you hear anything about that? In your official position as a Minister you frequently contacted Greek circles, did you not?
A. There were cases, especially for instance in the case of confiscated apartments, where the Greeks first turned to me, and I then passed on these requests, but then later on, once they had known General Felmy more intimately, they would go to him directly, and then would tell me afterward that they had been received in a kindly manner with their requests.
Q. Do you remember the German Heroes Memorial Day there?
A. Yes, that is a matter which I described as typical of Felmy in my affidavit. The Germans always observed the Heroes Memorial Day there every spring, and General Felmy initiated the custom at that time that a wreath be placed on the grave of the Unknown Greek Soldier in the presence of a guard of honor. That became an established tradition. I am also reminded of another matter.
Q. Yes. I suppose you are thinking of the Sunday of Sacrifices?
A. Yes.
Q. I meant to ask you about that.
A. Yes, the Sunday of Sacrifices in October, 1941, when collections were made for the benefit of the Greek Red Cross under the patronage of the Metropolitan area and General Felmy supplied the orchestra, collected money among the troops, and he himself gave a little speech in the biggest cinema of the town, addressed to the guests who had been invited.
Q. Who was Chairman of that concert?
A. The patronage was in the hands of Metropolitan of Athens, Archbishop Damaskinos.
Q. Do you know what archbishop Damaskinos' opinion was of General Felmy?
A. Well, I never heard one unfriendly word uttered by him concerning General Felmy.
Q. Dr. Altenburg, I have only one final question to you. General Felmy in this trial has been indicted for having terrorized and annihilated the Greek population. Do you know anything about that from your own observations or from hearsay?
A. When I was stationed down there, I never heard anything of that sort raised against General Felmy. I do not think the General would have been in a position to do anything of that sort.
Q. Why could he not have done that?
A. As the Commanding General of 3 villages in the neighborhood of Athens and a bit of Pyraeus, Cape Sunion, it scarcely is possible to exterminate the Greek population.
Q. Do you think it would be in his character to do that?
A. No, it would be ridiculous to think that, in my opinion.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: I have no further questions.
PRESIDING JUSTICE CARTER: Are there any questions by Defense Counsel?
DIRECT EXAMINATION WITNESS ALTENBURG BY DR. LATERNSER:If the Tribunal please, I have a few questions to ask this witness on behalf of Field Marshal List.
Q. Dr. Altenburg, how long have you been in custody?
A. I was released in November of last year, and on the 2nd of April of this year I was rearrested.
Q. Do you know why?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: If the Court please I object to this. The witness is being brought here primarily to testify to General Felmy's character, and Dr. Laternser has asked permission to interrogate him regarding Field Marshal List. I do not see that this last question has anything to do with either of those.
JUSTICE CARTER: The objection is overruled.
BY DR. LATERNSER:
Q. Dr. Altenburg, you may answer my question.
A. Why I had been rearrested, you mean. I gave an answer to Dr. Mueller-Torgow, namely, that I had been arrested as a witness for those two trials.
Since 2 April I have been rearrested, yes.
Q. And since then you have been in custody without interruption?
A. Yes.
Q. Dr. Altenburg, please answer my questions only after having made a brief pause so that the interpreter can interpret.
How long were you in Greece?
A. From between the end of April, 1941, until November, 1943.
Q. Who, at the beginning of your work, was Commanderin-Chief of the 12th Army in Greece?
A. That was Field Marshal List.
Q. What welfare measures were taken by Field Marshal List while he was serving in Greece for the benefit of the Greek population?
A. As I said, in the case of General Felmy, he took a permanent part in releasing food supplies, medical supplies, and above all for the capital of Athens.
Q. Where were the Medical supplies and food supplies taken from?
A. They came from Army Depots.
Q. Dr. Altenburg, please wait a moment until you answer my question.
Were children fed at that time?
A. Well, that was the most important thing. The wife of Vice Prime Minister Logalopopoulos, who was particularly interested in feeding the children of the city of Athens, and it was for these feeding arrangements, that the Field Marshal released food supplies on several occasions.
Q. In what zone was Athens situated at that time?
A. I think this should be stressed especially. Athens was in the Italian Zone of Occupation, but nevertheless the Field Marshal released supplies from German stores.
Q. What do you know about wheat supplies from Germany?
A. About what supplies from Germany, I can say this. We made every effort together with the Greek population, to supply Athens and the more important cities in Salonika with wheat. That wheat had been promised us, but all of a sudden an order of Ribbentrop's arrived that it was to be discontinued in October. I went to see the Field Marshal at that time.