Naturally, I had more to do with the Chief of staff than with the Commander in Chief. And for that reason I visited him officially, repeatedly. Finally, after the winter of 1941, a very lively personal relation with the Staff Office of the Army took place in my casino. For example, during the Christmas celebration the staff of the Army was almost completely represented, and also during my goodbye party.
Q General, I think a translation came through incorrectly. The way I heard it when you were mentioning the commanders of the Eleventh Army, the name von Albensleven come through as your successor.
A I want to complete this. Einsatzgruppe D was given to Overfuehere Bierkamp, but he was with Einsatzgruppe D only for a snort time in the Crimea. The Crimea was given over to the civil administration and Albensleben became SS and Police Leader for the Crimea, and, therefore, he became successor for that area. Not in my position as chief of the Einsatzgruppe. question, your personal contacts and official contacts with the Army under General von Manstein were more frequent and more friendly than with his predecessor, General von Schobert? before he died, in battle.
Q. Can you remember now when General von Mannstein succeeded General von Schobert, that is, the approximate date?
A. I cannot remember the exact date, but I think that von Mannstein beemae successor of von Schobert in September 1941 at the latest.
Q. Now did General von Schobert, or General Mannstein ever issue orders to your Gruppe concerning executions?
A. That question is to concrete, Mr. Prosecutor. Such orders existed in various forms. For example, if he told the defendant Siebert, who is present here, that retalliation measures which he had ordered were not sufficient, and for that reason he would have to take a hand himself, or concretely, as I described concerning Sinferopol, where the Army requested that the liquidation of Jews be carried out immediately. Apart from that the idea of killing certain persons like, for example, the insane people, but I can not always say, of course, that this was of the Army itself. But the Einsatzoommandos, were assigned to corps or divisions, so that they had contact with the commandos, and, therefore, the task of issueing individual orders was later given to the smaller units rather than to the Central Offices.
Q. Then General von Mannstein did personally issue instructions or orders concerning the executions in Sinferopol, about which we have spoken?
A. No, I cannot say that, but an instruction came, sofar as I remember after discussing it with Braune, it came from the Quartermaster General Oberst Hauch, Colonel Hauch, but in the organization of the Army, it is natural that the Quartermaster General on his own authority cannot do such things without the approval of his commanderin-chief. I, therefore, cannot say that von Mannstein knew about it, or that he ordered it. I am merely considering it to be so owing to the military situations.
Q. It is highly probable that General von Mannstein did know and did instruct his staff officer to issue orders which came to you, is that correct?
A. In that case I cannot imagine that a staff officer as to his own authority can make such demands.
Q. General, who were the Army officers with whom you usually had conferences as to the activity of the Eisatzgruppen-D?
A. That was I-C.
Q. Can you give me his name?
A. First, Major Rank, R-A-N-K. Later his successor, Major Eisler, or Colonel Eisler; the I C-A-I, Major Riesen, E-I-E-S-E-N, and the chief of the Partisan combatting unit was Major Steffanus. The other staff officers I think are not of such great interest in this connection, that is, the I-A, there was Oberst Bussel, and von Werner. They are the most important names I know of.
Q. You say all of these were on the staff of General von Schobert, or General Mannstein.
A. Yes.
Q. Did these same officers whom you have named hand down to you orders for the execution of Jews?
A. No, I cannot say that.
Q. For the execution of Gypsies?
A. No, I cannot say that, either.
Q. For the execution of the insane?
A. As I said before, I do not definitely know whether this order was given by the Central office or from the Medical offices, or from the Regional offices.
Q. Who issued the orders for killing of active Communists and Soviet officials?
A. For these groups the order was contained in the general Fuehrer's Order.
Q. I believe you testified a few moments ago that the liaison officer of Einsatzgruppe-D with the 11th Army was the present defendant Seibert?
A. No, the liaison officer was another man. Siebert belonged to my staff, and was in my billets, while the liaison officer was another officer, who was in the staff of the Army, and also shared his billets with the Army.
Q. Now, General, you have admitted here that during the time you commanded Einsatzgruppe-D, an unidentified number of persons were executed, by the units under your command, and, I believe you testified further that the responsibility for the actual executions generally were in the kommando leader, am I correct?
A. Responsibility is a word which can be explained in different ways, those who gave the order; were responsible. They were responsible for the carrying out in this case.
Q. Just a matter of information, will you state in detail what normal channel the order went through from the authority issuing it to the man who actually pulled the trigger?
A. I believe my entire examinations show that this order was given once, namely, in Pretsch, and, therefore, the initiative was given, and, therefore, no new initial order was given in my time. Such an original order I did not get anyhow, unless one could consider the order to pick out PW's from PW camps as an extra order. The original order, as I have said, was sent to the chiefs of the Einsatzgruppen, and to the Kommando leaders who were assembled.
Q. This in effect is true, is it not? Because of the difficulty of communications in the area in which you found yourself, you Kommando leaders were largely, because of poor communications, independent units, were they not?
A. The Kommando leaders were independent, there is no doubt about that. They had to be able to act independently for reasons as you gave just now.
Q. And they made a great many decisions without having to consult either you or higher authorities, did they not?
A. These decisions, Mr. Prosecutor, have to be stated more definitely. In this general form I cannot answer, yes or no.
Q. I apologize. They made tactical situations without consulting higher----tactical decisions-----I am sorry, without consulting higher headquarters, did they not?
A. Of course,
Q. How to select these commanders, great care had to be exercised as to their ability. Their initiative and their general ability to do the job?
A. Of course.
Q. And they were trusted sub-unit commanders of yours?
A. It is rather difficult to answer this.
Q. I will repeat General. I shall rephrase the question. Because of their careful selection, you relied on their judgment in given situations, did you not?
A. The Kammando leaders had certain tasks. These tasks they had to carry out. I did not choose the Kommando Leaders, or else they would have been quite different ones, but they were appointed by the RSHA, and they had to carry out the task which they had been assigned, and I had to rely on it, that according to their best ability they would fulfill these tasks. But since I did not rely on it completely, I tried by inspections to find out whether the commandos were in order, and whether the tasks were carried out. Unfortunately, as to some commanders, it was possible to go there, even once within six months, because it was rather difficult to get there. I had no influence in choosing Kommando leaders, either.
Q. In your direct examination you have explained your position and relationship with the Chief of the 11th Army. My question in connection with this topic may be, therefore, in a sense a little repetitious, but nevertheless, I would like you to answer this for the information of the Tribunal. Which were the special tasks which were assigned to you by the Army on the basis of the so-called Barbaressa Decree?
A. The basic task surely was to supply information and to look after the policing and the security of the Army. Beyond that the Army gave definite detailed tasks, and those changed according to the situation. For example, in July and August the harvest had to be brought in, the rear, had to be guarded; in November and December and January, to make inquiries about the partisans and to fight them; immediate military commitments, and then again the information service. These changed according to the situation.
MR. WALTON: At this time, may it please the Tribunal, I should like to submit to the witness for his examination, and later to be introduced into evidence, the document under NOKW-256. There are copies in the German language ready for distribution just as there are in the English now. I think it would be fair to Dr. Aschenauer at this time if he choosesto inspect it, and if he desires to make an objection I shall await on him at this time.
THE PRESIDENT: You are subitting it now for identification and scrutiny prior to actual introducing it as an exhibit?
MR. WALTON: Yes, and unless it is ruled out, sir, I should like for it to be given an identification number, so that it can be more easily introducedinto evidence by its number at a later time.
THE PRESIDENT: I think it might be well to give it an exhibit number at once.
MR. WALTON: According to my count, sir, the exhibit number it is entitled to is No. 174. I am ready to stand corrected if that is an error.
THE PRESIDENT: Has the witness received it?
MR. WALTON: I submitted it to his counsel, first.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. If you have an extra copy, let Dr. Aschenauer have one. If so, he can read it simultaaneously.
MR. WALTON: Yes, sir, but I would like Dr.Aschenauer to see the original, first.
THE PRESIDENT: I see, alright. Secretary General, have you enlightened Mr. Walton on the correctness of the exhibit number?
THE SECRETARY-GENERAL: Exhibit No. 174 is correct.
THE PRESIDENT: That is correct.
MR. WALTON: Before I can ask him, the witness will have to read it, first. It is not too long, but it consists of several pages.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
MR. WALTON: General, will you indicate when you have finished reading it, please?
THE WITNESS: Yes (after reading same) I am ready.
MR. WALTON: Thank you. BY MR. WALTON: containing this Decree? the so-called Barbarossa Decree. I do not think that this draft actually constitutes the Barbarossa Decree, but considerable parts are contained in the Barbarossa Decree. I believe that there are not a great number of differences in the contents.
outlining the collaboration of the Sonderkommandos, and the Army in the rear areas?
A I just forgot one thing. This text shows in this draft the fact that the Einsatzgruppen in the operational areas are mentioned, and also Einsatzgruppen in the rear areas. There were no such double assignment. Only one Einsatzgruppe was assigned to the Army, to each group, and the Army group decided how they were to be used. in the forwarded areas, the Army decided that?
Q now, isn't it true, that this Barbarossa Decree, that Himmler's orders based on it made it plain that the Sonderkommando should carry out their missions under their own responsibility? expression "own responsibility" were, I presume, that this means that the chief of the Security Police, and the SD could give instructions to these commandos, which then were carried out on their responsibility; but it never meant beyond the authority of the Army, or rather of the Army group, and this limitation, as is shown in this draft also, because every time it is said that the instructions are to be given to the Army, the Army can make restrictions. The Army can exclude areas; it can make restrictions if the operational situation required it. Later in the Barbarossa Decree, it says that the operational necessity could cause instruction of the Army, and change them. This sense is revealed clearly in this draft, "own responsibility" never means beyond the actual authority of the commander-in-chief.
of the Army, as contained in his task. This is shown in the assignment of the Einsatzgruppen and in the instructions of the OKW for the competence of the commander-in-chief. of the order, the Fuehrer Order, subject to the tactical situation at any time, which was the responsibility of the Army as to how to carry out these missions was entirely up to the decision of the Einsatzgruppe, was it not? draft of the Barbarossa Decree include executions? the executions, the Einsatz commanders had the order, and the tasks were given to them to carry out certain executions, of course.
Q By the Barbarossa Decree?
A No, no, I did not say that. At least, I did not intend to say that. I do not know that in the Barbarossa Decree this order for extermination is contained. To repeat it. I do not know that in the Barbarossa agreement the Fuehrer Order anything about the killing of certain groups of population was contained.
Q General, I won't quarrel with you, but the testimony is very clear on your oders for execution. I leave that point at this time. Now, General, did it ever happen that the order of the Commander of the 11th Army, or his staff, was given directly to the Kommandos -- these units which were subordinate to you?
A Which orders?
Q Any orders?
they did not pass through your headquarters? distribution lists, a written order to a command was given to me to see. This was only so if they were orders by the Army. Orders by a Corps, or by the Division I did not see, of course. after the order was actually given? Army corps gave an order to s sub-unit of yours?
A Whether I was informed? from your headquarters, and attached to the Army corps, do you follow me? commando 11-B should be committed for a certain specific task, the Army group commander issued an order directly to the commander of the Einsatzkommando 11-B?
Q. Now, were you later through official correspondence or through reports of your kommando informed that that actual order was given?
A. Of course, in writing or orally if the command leader considered it necessary that I should knew about this event.
Q. Then yourinformation did not come from a copy of that order sent to you through official channels, but through the report of your kammando leader?
A. In that case, if the Army did not give a written order, only that way of course. If they gave a written order, on the whole they would have given me a copy.
Q. Then you obtained your knowledge of this type of orders from a report submitted to you by your kommando leader?
A. Yes.
Q. General, was it the task of the liaison officer of the different units of the Einsatsgruppen to transmit such orders?
A. I believe I must ask a preliminary question. By liaison officer you mean the officer who was in the staff of the Army?
Q. Yes.
A. In the document book such an occurrence is mentioned, the case with Romanenko. There, the document shows that the liaison officer got an order from the Commander-in-Chief and gave it to the commando itself immediately. This shows that the command wasin the place where the Commander-in-Chief was, while I was with the stuff of the Einsatzgruppenabout two hundred kilimeters to the west. Therefore, if the Commander-in-Chief wanted to hand something to a command, he could easily give such instructions to the liaison officer.
MR. WALTON: Now I shall have to avail myself of the privilege of forgetting one or two questions. Your Honor, I should like to draw the witness's attention bact to some moments ago when I was asking him about who had the authority to make selections for executions. It is entirely out of the context now, but my attention has been called to it. I ask I ask permission to go back and ask him.
THE PRESIDENT: I recall that you did go over that subject, but there is no reason why you can't go back to it.
Q. (By Mr. Walton) There is one class which I forgot to ask who made the selection. General, who made the selection of Communist and Soviet officials for execution?
A. The procedure was that certain persons were arrested and these persons were examined and were taken to be examined, as is usual, by the police. The interrogating officer, mostly together with the kommando keader, determined the result of the examination, and with that they determined whether the man endangered the security, as the result of the examination, or whether he did not, and they passed a judgment on this person.
Q. It usually turned out, did it not, that a member of the Communist Party and a Soviet official of the Communist Party or of the civil administration were considered a definite threat to the security of the German armed forces?
A. Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, in carrying out the procedure which you have just indicated, I assume that in many, if not all of the towns, that you would find yourself liquidating the governing authorities, the mayors, the councils, etc., because naturally they would be members of the Communist Party, is that true?
THE WITNESS: Insofar as I know the conditions in the cities or districts where the Einsatzkommandos entered, there was no administration any more, but the leading personalities had escaped or were hidden.
Q. (By Mr. Walton) General, how were the condemned people assembled for an execution?
A. In detail I cannot describe that.
Q. I believe you stated in the matter of the Jews the registration through the Council of Elders stated who were the Jews. Now, if it was determined that so many would be executed, were the Council of Elders instructed to assemble so many people?
A. To assemble the people, yes.
Q. Now, was there any pretext given, either by the kommando leader or by the Jewish Council of Elders, to get these people to assemble?
A. Yes, for example, on the resettlement question.
Q. They were told that they had to move or they would be moved to a place for resettlement, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Now then, what disposition was made of these people after they had assembled in the market square or at the place designated?
A. It was tried, for example, to compare whether registration lists were the same as the persons present. The persons were then assembled and then were taken to be executed.
Q. Were they sometimes marched to the place of execution?
A. No they were taken there by trucks. I just described how in Simferopol the Army gave trucks for this purpose.
THE PRESIDENT: Did the Council of Jewish Elders know what was the real purpose of the demanding of this list of the Jews?
THE WITNESS: Certainly not in my Einstazgruppe.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, after the first contingent had been marched away or transported away, was it not then very obvious the purpose of the obtaining of this list?
THE WITNESS: In a city the Jews were then assembled all at once, at one time, for example in barracks or in a large school or in a factory site.
THE PRESIDENT: Do I understand then that no executions took place until the Council of Jewish Elders had completed their work of making up the lists?
A. Yes.
Q. (By Mr. Walton) Now, did you have any Army directives or any orders stating the minimum distances from Army headquarters where these people could be executed?
A. In the case of Simferopol the Army decreed that shootings should take place at a certain distance from the city. The same occurred at Nikolajev.
Q. By certain distance do you mean a certain distance from the headquarters or from the Army installation or from the city itself?
A. In Simferopol from the city; in Nikolajev from the headquarters.
Q. Now, what was the general method used in execution?
A. Only one method wasused by me. That was the military manner.
Q. Am I to infer from that execution by shooting?
A. Yes.
Q. In what position were these victims shot?
A. Standing up or kneeling.
Q. What disposition was made of the corpses of the executed victims?
A. They were buried in that same place. The kammandos, who carried out the executions, had to prepare the burying so that no signs of the executions could be seen afterwards.
Q. What was done with the personal property of the persons executed, General?
A. The personal property was confiscated. The valuables, according to orders, were given to the Reich Ministry of Finance or rather to the Reichsbank. The personal property was at the disposal of the local kommando and the city, except for exceptions in Simferopol where the Army was assigned a group of the National Socialist Peoples' Welfare Organization who took care of the textile items.
Q. Were all the victims, including the men, the women and the children, executed in the same way?
A. Until the spring of '42, when by Himmler's order it was determined that women and children be killed by gassing in gas vans. Your Honor, I ask to make a remark about a question in yesterday's examination.
I think a mistake arose to the effect that Your Honor asked me whether from the reports from the kommandos the fact that children were shot could be seen. Should I have answered to the effect that this opinion was confirmed, that would be wrong. My confirmation in the IMT that men, women and children are contained in the figures is merely a conclusion from the fact that Jewish men women, and children were to be shot. In the reports which came from the Kommandos no such difference was made. Actually I do not remember any report where children - or figures of children - are mentioned. I repeat, the statement, on which I confirm, was a conclusion I came to following the order.
THE PRESIDENT: I understand then that a report indicating that 5,000 Jews had been killed would not specify so many children, so many women, but just 5,000 persons?
THE WITNESS: Yes, yes.
Q. (By Mr. Walton) Let me refresh any memory, General, please. I believe you stated in answer to the last question that executions were entirely in the form of shootings until the spring of '42 when you received an order to have women and children executed by gas vans, am sorry I missed your statement as to where this order originated, or from whence this order came.
A. The order of the gas vans came from Himmler immediagely and was given to special units who had these gas vans.
Q. These units who had charge of the operation and the maintenance of the gas vans stayed with the vans all the time?
A. Yes, I only saw it myself for a short time because it occurred shortly before I resigned, but the drivers remained there while the officer who had come along originally left later on, but the reason for this was mainly that the vans were refused by the kommando leaders, and I was not prepared to force the kommando leaders to use these vans. The vans were practically not used.
Q. General, have you ever seen yourself a gas van?
A. Yes.
Q. Will you give a short description of the physical appearance of a gas van to the Tribunal?
A. It is an ordinary truck just like a box car. It looks like that, like a closed truck.
Q. No windows in the gas van?
A. I beg your pardon?
Q There were no windows?
A. It is possible.
Q. The back of the gas van, did it have a thick door which led into the interior of the gas van?
A. Of course.
Q. And this door was narrow where only one person could enter at a time?
A. No, I believe it was an ordinary door as any other truck has it.
Q. Now were the people selected for execution induced to enter these vans?
A. One could not see from the van what purpose it had, and the people were told that they were being moved, and therefore they entered without hisitation.
Q. The same information was given them that they would be moved for purposes of resettlement?
A. Yes.
Q. General, could you estimate how many persons could be accommodated at one time in these vans?
A. There were large vans and small vans. The small one might have taken fifteen persons and the large one thirty.
Q. Did you ever learn how long it would take to execute persons by the use of these lathal gas vans after they were subjected to gas?
A. As far as I remember about ten minutes.
Q. Did all of your kommandos use these vans?
A. No, because there were more kommandos than vans. Apart from that one van was no good because they had come from Berlin. One van was sent to Taganrog immediately without my seeing it and never came back, and the other two vans remained in Simferopol.
Q. Did Sonderkommando 10-A ever use one of these vans?
A. I already said that one van was sent to command 10-A immediately.
Q. I apologize then. I missed it. Did 10-B ever use one of these vans?
A. No, I am not sure whether they did use it. I cannot swear to it, but I don't think so
Q. I accept your answers as the best of your recollection and belief. Did Sonderkommando 11-A use one?
A. No, as I said, the two vans were in Simferopol.
Q. 11-B, did it ever use one?
A. 11-B will have used it I think
Q. And Einsatzkommando 12, do you recollect it ever had one?
A. No, they certainly did not have one.
Q. Now many people do you estimate - I am sure that you do not remember the exact number, but how many people do you estimate were executed by these vans by Einsatzgrppe D?
A. Please save my mentioning these figures because I don't know anything about 10-A and concerning 11-B the van may have been used two or three times, I an not sure. I myself hardly saw the van, but only the first time, together with the physician, I had a look that the people died without any difficulties, and then I must have left. I don't know whether it was used again.
Q. Then some people were executed by means of the gas vans by your subkommandos?
A. Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: What was the purpose-
A. Not by myself.
Q. (By Mr. Walton) By your units.
A. Not by myself.
THE PRESIDENT: Did you always have a physician with you?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: And what was the immediate purpose of the services of this physician?
THE WITNESS: He was unit physician really, but I also used him, of course, for such purposes as expert.
THE PRESIDENT: I see. But his primary purpose was to supervise the health of your men?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
Q. (By Mr. Walton) General, when you were on direct examination you stated, and I quote your own words. "The Army left it to me to deal with the political situation in the Crimea." Was the task of cleaning the Crimea of Jews, gypsies and above all Communists considered a political task?
A. No, If I talked of a political task here, among the various groups of the populations it could be found, for example, the difference between the Tartars and the Ukrainians, or those from Creat Russia and the Ukraineians, to set up administrations of small localities. For example, if in a parish there were different groups of populations, to see to it that when the mayor was appointed a person was taken who was appropriate to the numbers of the population under him.
Q. Then the executions were solely a security task and the tasks which you have outlines in your previous answer were the general political tasks
A. Yes.
MR. WALTON: May it please the Tribunal, I wish no question now the witness on certain of the documents in the Prosecution's book. This is the end of a phase of. my cross-examination. If the Tribunal so wishes to have the recess at this time, I think it is proper as far as my examination is concerned.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Just before we recess I would like to state this to Defense Counsel. I presume that some of you will want to present documents. I heartily recommend that you begin to assemble those documents immediately. There is a great problem, as you know, here, in the palace of Justice in the matter of translating documents and then getting them properly mimeographed, COURT IIA CASE 9 and if you wait until your client is about to take the stand to busy yourself in the preparation of these socalled document books we will find ourselves in such a state of congestion that it will be impossible to get the books out in time.
