And the Biography continues:
"At first, von Papen retired to his estate Wallerfangen in the Saar district but soon the Fuehrer required his services again in that he on the 18 April 1939, appointed von Papen German Ambassador in Ankara." time it was at a date when the seizure of Czechoslovakia could have left no shadow of doubt in Papen's mind that Hitler was determined to pursue his program of aggression.
the last paragraph but one:
"After his return to the Reich--" That was in 1944--"von Papen was awarded the Knight's Cross of the War Merit Order with Swords."
In conclusion, I draw the Tribunal's attention again to the fulsome praises which Hitler publicly bestowed upon von Papen for his services, especially in the earlier days. I have given two instances where Hitler said "his collaboration is infinitely valuable", and again, "You posses my most complete and unlimited confidence." the diplomat, Papen, the man of breeding and culture--there was the man who could overcome the hostility and antipathy of those respectable elements who barred Hitler's way. Papen was--to repeat the words by Sir Hartly Shawcross in his opening speech--"One of the men whose cooperation and support made the Nazi Government of Germany possible."
That concludes my case. Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe will now follow with the case of von Neurath.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: May it please the Tribunal, the presentation against the defendant von Neurath falls into five parts, and the first of these is concerned with the following positions and honors which he held. he was awarded the Golden Party Badge on 30 January 1937.
He was General in the SS. He was personally appointed Gruppenfuehrer by Hitler September 1937 and promoted to Obergruppenfuehrer on 21 June 1943. the defendant von Papenfrom 2 June 1932 and under the Chancellorship of Hitler from 30 January 1933 until he was replaced by the defendant von Ribbentrop on 4 Febuary 1938. appointed on 4 Febuary 1938, and he was a member of the Reich Defense Council. 1939 until he was replaced by the defendant Frick on 25 August, 1943.
as Reich Protector. The defendant Ribbentrop was the only other German to receive this decoration. which is US Exhibit No. 19, and in that document, which is signed by the defendant and his counsel, the defendant makes comments on certain of these matters with which I should like to deal. January 1937 against his will and without his being asked. the allegedly unwanted honor, but after receiving it, attended meetings at which wars of aggression were planned, actively participated in the rape of Austria and tyranized over Bohemia and Moravia.
against his will and without his being asked. the receipt of the further promotion to Obergruppenfuehrer and the actions against Bohemia and Moravia must be considered when the defendant's submission is examined. president von Hindenburg. of the defendant von Papen and Hitler and to the fact that President von Hindenburg died in 1934. This defendant continued as Foreign Minister until 1938. February 1938 until May 1945.
At. the moment, attention is drawn to the activities which will be mentioned below and to the terrible evidence as to Bohemia and Moravia which willbe forthcoming from our friend, the Soviet Prosecutor.
This defendant's next point is that the Secret Cabinet Council never sat or conferred. committee of the Cabinet for the deliberation of foreign affairs, and the Tribunal will find that description in Document 1774-PS, which I now put in as Exhibit GB 246. This is an extract from a book by a well-known author, and on Page 2 of the document book -- the document book is numbered in red at the top right hand corner -- the first page of that document, in about the seventh line from thebottom of the page, they will see that among the bureaus subordinated to the Fuehrer for direct counsel and assistance, number four is the Privy Cabinet Council; President: ReichMinister Frh. von Nuerath. about ten lines from the top, they will see the paragraph beginning;
"A privy cabinet council, to advise the Fuehrer in the basic problems of foreign policy, has been created by the decree of 4 February 1938," and a reference is given.
"This privy cabinet council is under the direction of Reich-Minister v. Neurath, and includes the Foreign Minister, the Air Minister, the Deputy Commander for the Fuehrer, the Propaganda Minister, the Chief of the Reich-Chancellery, the Commanders-in-Chief of the Army and Navy and the Chief of the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces.
The privy cabinet council constitutes a select staff of collaborators of the Fuehrer which consists exclusively of members of the Government of the Reich; thus, it represents a select committee of the Reich Government for the deliberation on foreign affairs." document 2031-PS, which is Exhibit GB 217. I believe that has been put in. I needn't read it again. he was not a member of the Reich Defense Council. Tribunal that the Reich Defense Council was set up soon after Hitler's accession to power on 4 April 1933, and the Tribunal will find a note of that point in document 2261-PS, US Exhibit 24, and they will find that on the top of page 12 of the document book there is a reference to the date of the establishment of the Reich Defense Council. United States Exhibit 409, which is the affidavit of the Defendant Frick, which the Tribunal will find on page 14. In about the middle of that short affidavit, Defendant Frick says:
"We were also members of the Reich Defense Council which was supposed to plan preparations in case of war which later on were published by the Ministerial Council for the Defense of the Reich." Foreign Affairs, who was then the Defendant von Neurath, is shown by Document EC-177, United States Exhibit 390. If the Tribunal will turn to page 16 of the document book, they will find that document, and at the foot of the page, the composition of the Reich Defense Council, permanent members including the Minister for Foreign Affairs. That document is dated "Berlin, 22 May 1933" which was during this Defendant's tenure of that office. That is the first stage.
Defendant's department, von Beulow, present, is shown by the minutes of the 12th meeting on 14 May 1936. That is Document EC-407, which I put in as GB-247. The Tribunal will find at page 21 that the minutes are for the 14th of May 1936, and the actual reference to an intervention of von Beulow is in the middle of page 22. This Defendant was, under the terms of that law, a member of the Reich Defense Council by virtue of his office as president of the Secret Cabinet Council. That is shown by the document 2194-PS, U.S. Exhibit 36, which the Tribunal will find at page 24, and if you wall lock at page 24, you will see that the actual copy which was put in evidence was enclosed in a letter addressed to the Reich Protector in Bohemia and Moravia on the 6th of September, 1939. It is rather curious that the Reich Protector for Bohemia and Moravia is now denying his membership in the Council when the letter enclosing the law is one addressed to him. is still that document, the last words on that page describe the tasks of that Council and say, "The task of the Reich Defense Council consists, in peacetime, of the decision on all measures for the preparation of Reich defense, and the gathering together of all forces and means of the nation according to the directions of the Leaders and ReichsChancellor. The tasks of the Council in wartime will be especially determined by the Leader and ReichsChancellor." permanent members of the Council are listed, and then the seventh one is the President of the Secret Cabinet Council, who was, again, this Defendant. Defendant's statement that he was not a member of the Reich Defense Council. Defendant is that in assuming the position of Minister of Foreign Affairs in Hitler's Cabinet, this Defendant assumed charge of a foreign policy committed to breach of treaties.
We say first that the Nazi Party had repeatedly and for many years made known its intention to overthrow Germany's international commitments, even at the risk of war.
We refer to Sections 1 and 2 of the Party Program, which, as the Tribunal has heard, was published year after year. That is on page 32 of the document book. It is Document 1708-PS, U. S. Exhibit 255.
I just remind the Tribunal of these points 1 and 2:
"1. We demand the unification of allGermans in the Greater Germany on the basis of the right of self-determination of peoples.
"2. We demand equality of rights for the German people in respect to the other nations; abrogation of the peace treaties of Versailles and St. Germain."
But probably clearer than th is the statement contained in Hitler's speech at Munich on the 15th of March, 1939, and the Tribunal will find one of the references to that on page 40. And, if I may warn the Tribunal, in the document book page 40 appears directly after page 34. I'm sorry, some of the pages have got out of order. But on page 40, at the middle of the page, you will find a reference to that speech. It begins:
"My foreign policy had identical aims. My program was to abolish the Treaty of Versailles. It is futile nonsense for therest of the world to pretend today that I did not reveal this program until 1933 or 1935 or 1937. Instead of listening to the foolish chatter of emigrees, these gentlemen would have been wiser to read what I have written thousands of times."
It is futile nonsense for foreigners to raise that point. It would be still morefutile for Hitler's Foreign Minister to suggest that he was ignorant of the aggressive designs of the policy. But I remind the Tribunal that the acceptance of force as a means of solving international problems and achieving the objectives of Hitler's foreign policy must have been known to anyone as closely in touch with Hitler as the Defendant von Neurath, and I remind the Tribunal, simply by reference to the passages from Mein Kampf which were quoted by my friend Mr. Elwyn Jones, especially those towards the end of the book, pages 552, 553 and 554.
So that the Prosecution say that by the acceptance of this foreign policy, the Defendant von Neurath assisted and promoted the accession to power ofthe Nazi Party.
Affairs this Defendant directed the international aspects of the first phase of the Nazi conspiracy, the consolidation of control in preparation for war. this Defendant must have known the cardinal points of Hitler's policy leading up to the outbreak of the World War, as outlined in retrospect by Hitler in his speech to his military leaders on the 23rd of November, 1939.
This policy had two facets: internally, the establishment of rigid control; externally, the program to release Germany from its international ties.
The external program had four points:
1. Secession from the disarmament conference;
2. The order to re-arm Germany;
3. The introduction of compulsory military service; and 4. The remilitarization of the Rhineland.
find after page 41 - in the document book, at the end of the first paragraph they will find these points very briefly set out, and perhaps I might just read that passage. It is Document 789-PS, U.S. Exhibit 23 - about ten lines before the break:
"I had to reorganize everything beginning with the mass of the people and extending it to the armed forces. First, reorganization of the interior, abolishment of appearance of decay and defeatist ideas, education to heroism. While reorganizing the interior, I undertook the second task, to release Germany from its international ties. Two particular characteristics are to be pointed out: secession from the League of Nations and denunciation of the disarmament conference. It was a hard decision. The number of prophets who predicted that it would lead to the occupation of the Rhineland was large, the number of believers was very small. I was supported by the nation, which stood firmly behind me, when I carried out my intentions. After that, the order for rearmament. Here a ain there were numerous prophets who predicted misfortunes, and only a few believers. In 1935 the introduction of compulsory armed service. After that, militarization of the Rhineland, again a process believed to be impossible at that time. The number of people who would trust in me were very small. Then the beginning of the fortification of the whole country, especially in the West."
Now, these are summarized in four points. The defendant von Neurath participated directly and personally in accomplishing each of these four aspects of Hitler's foreign policy, at the same time officially proclaiming that these measures did not constitute steps toward aggression.
The first is a matter of history. When Germany left the disarmament conference this defendant sent telegrams dated the 14th of October, 1933, to the President of the Conference - and that will be found in the document, Dokumente Der Deutschen Politik, on page 94 of the first volume for that year. Similarly this defendant made the announcement of Germany's withdrawal from the League of Nations on the 21st of October, 1933. That again will be found in the official documents. These are referred to in the transcript of this Tribunal on page 402 and 450, and I remind the Tribunal of the complementary documents of military preparation which of course were read, and which are documents C.140, U.S. Exhibit 51, the 25th of October, 1933, and C.153, U.S. Exhibit 43, the 12th of May 1934.
These have already been read and I merely collect them for the memory and assistance of the Tribunal.
The second point of the rearmament of Germany: When this defendant was Foreign Minister, on the 10th of March 1935, the German Government officially announced the establishment of the German air force. Document TC 44 GB Exhibit 11, already referred to. On the 21st of May 1935, Hitler announced a purported unilateral repudiation of the Naval, Military and Air clauses of the Treaty of Versailles and the Treaty for the Restoration of Friendly Relations with the United States, and that will be found in Document 2288PS, U.S. Exhibit 38, which again has already been read. On the same day the Reich Cabinet, of which this defendant was a member, enacted the secret "Reich Defense Law" creating the office of Plenipotentiary General for War Economy," afterwards described by the Wehrmacht armament expert as "the cornerstone of German rearmament." The reference to the law is document 2261-PS, U.S. Exhibit 24, letter of von Blomberg dated the 24th of June, 1935, enclosing this law, which is already before the Tribunal, and the reference to the comment on the importance of the law is document 2353-PS, U.S. Exhibit 35. Some of that has already been read, but if the Tribunal will be good enough to turn to page 52, where that appears, they will find an extract from page 35, and I might just give the Tribunal the last sentence: which was supposed to be published only in case of war, and was already declared valid for carrying out war preparations. As this law fixed the duties of the armed forces and the other Reich authorities in case of war, it was also the fundamental ruling for the development and activity of the war economy organization."
The third point is the introduction of compulsory military service. On the 16th of March 1935, this defendant signed the law for the organization of the armed forces which provided for universal military service and antici pated a vastly expanded German army.
This was described by the defendant Keitel as the real start of the large-scale rearmament program which followed. I will give the official reference in the Reichsgesetzblatt, year 1935, volume 1, teil 1, page 369; and the reference in the transcript, pages 454 and 455.
The fourth point was the remilitarization of the Rhineland. The Rhineland was reoccupied on the 7th of March 1936. I remind the Tribunal of the two complementary documents, 2289 PS, U.S. Exhibit 56, the announcement of this action by Hitler, and C.139, U.S. Exhibit 53, which is the "Operation Schulung," giving the military action which was to be taken if necessary. Again the reference to the transcript is page 458 to page 464. These were the acts for which the defendant shared responsibility from his position and from the steps which he took, but a little later he summed up his views on the actions detailed above in a speech before Germans abroad made on the 29th of August, 1937, of which I ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice, as it appears in Das Archiv, 1937, at page 650. But I quote a short portion of it that appears on page 72 of the document book:
"The unity of the racial and national will created through Nazism with unprecedented elan has made possible a foreign policy through which the bonds of the Versailles Treaty were slashed, freedom to arm regained and the sovereignty of the whole nation reestablished. We have again become master in our own home, and we have produced the means of power to remain henceforth that way for all times. The world should notice from Hitler's deeds and words that his aims are not aggressive war." complementary documents of military preparation which I have had the opportunity of putting before the Tribunal. both as Minister of Foreign Affairs and as one of the inner circle of the Fuehrer's advisers on foreign political matters, this defendant participated in the political planning and preparation for acts of aggression against Austria, Czechoslovakia and other nations.
If I might first put the defendant's policy in a sentence, I would say that it can be summarized as breaking one treaty only at a time. He himself put it - if I may so - slightly more pompously, but to the same effect in a speech before the Academy of German Law on the 30th of October 1937, which appears in Das Archiv, October 1937, page 921, and which the Tribunal will find in the document book on page 73. The underlining is mine:
"Out of the acknowledge of these elementary facts the Reich Cabinet has always interceded in favor of treating every concrete international problem within methods especially suited for it, not to complicate it unnecessarily by amalgamation with other problems and as long as problems between only two powers are concerned to choose the way for an immediate understanding between these two powers. We are in a position to state that this method has fully proved itself good not only in the German interest, but also in the general interest." parties to the various treaties that were dealt with in that way; and the working unto that policy can really be shown by looking in tabular form at the actions of this defendant when he was Foreign Minister or at his immediate successor when he still purported to have influence.
In 1935 the action was directed against the Western Powers. That action was the rearmament of Germany. When that was going on another country had to be reassured. At that time it was Austria, with the support of Italy - which Austria still had up to 1935. And so you get the fraudulent assurance, the essence of the technique in that case, given by Hitler, on the 21st of May 1935. And that is shown clearly to be false, by the document which Mr. Alderman put in - I give the general reference to the transcript on pages 534 to 545. Then, in 1936, you have still got the action necessary against the Western Powers in the occupation of the Rhineland. You still have a fraudulent assurance to Austria in the Treaty of the 11th of July of that year, and that is shown to be fraudulent by the letters from the Defendant von Papen, United States Exhibit 64 and 67, one of which my fri end Major Barrington has just referred to.
against Austria. We know what that action was. It was absorption, planned, at any rate, finally, at the meeting on the 5th of November, 1937, and action taken on the 11th of March, 1938. assurance to Belgium on the 13th of October, 1937, which was dealt with by my friend Mr. Roberts. The Tribunal will find the references in pages 1100 to 1126 of the transcript. Czechoslovakia. Or I should say we move forward six months to a year. There you have the Sudatenland obtained in September; the absorption of the whole of Bohemia and Moravia on the 15th of March, 1939. is given by Hitler on the 20th of Colonel Griffith-Jones's speech on Poland, which the Tribunal will of August, 1939, as shown by Mr. Alderman, at pages 1160 to 1216.
Latin tag,"res ipsa loquitur." But a quite frank statement from Mr. Bullitt, on the 18th of May, 1936, which is on page 74 of the they called on this Defendant, Mr. Bullitt says:
"Von Neurath said that it was the policy of the German Government to do nothing active in foreign affairs until "the Rhineland had been digested.
' He explained that he meant that, 'As soon as our fortifications are constructed and the countries of about their foreign policies and a new constellation will develop,' he said."
referred to by my friend, Mr. Barrington, a short time ago, between the Defendant von Papen as Ambassador and Mr. Messersmith, which is First:
during the early Nazi plottings against Secondly:
when the false assurance was given to which is GB-20.
The reference in the transcript is at pages Thirdly:
when the Defendant von Papen was carrying mind:
document 2247-PS, United States Exhibit 64--letter dated 1 September, 1936.
The references in the transcript are pages 492, were to conquer Austria and Czechoslovakia.
That is document page 82.
If you will look at the sixth line of page 82, after the if the Tribunal will look at "Case 3," the second sentence is, "For the improvement of our military political position, it must be threat from the flanks in case of a possible advance westwards."
That is developed on the succeeding page. The important point Then the next point.
During the actual Anschluss he received That is document 3045-PS, United States Exhibit 127.
He sent the document referred to them before--is at the top of page 93.
I wish The Defendant von Neurath states in the sixth line, "It is presented the Federal President with a conditional ultimatum.
It is a pure invention."
of the German Government. Otherwise the invasion of Austria by "The truth of the matter is that the question of sending restore peace and order and to avoid bloodshed.
Faced with the addressed to it."
Goering's telephone conversations with Austria on that day, which the Defendant's Jodl's diary for the 11th, 13th and 14th of obvious correction is in the transcripts of the Defendant Goering's Defendant who, according to the Defendant Jodl's diary -this point quite clear?
It is page 116 of the document book, the entry in the Defendant Jodl's diary for the 10th of March.
It is the third paragraph, and it says:
"At 13.00 hours General Keitel informs Chief of Operational Staff and Admiral Canaris.
Ribbentrop is being detained in London.
Neurath takes over the Foreign Office."
United States Exhibit 68. If the Tribunal will look at page 175 this crisis.
Two-thirds of the way down the page the paragraph beings:
"I should emphasize here in this statement that the men who "In an official dispatch to the Department of State from "'Europe will not get away from the myth that Neurath, Papen of the old school.
They are in fact servile instruments of the harmless they are able to work more effectively.
They are able to in sympathy with the regime.
'" THE PRESIDENT:
The Tribunal will adjourn now.
(Whereupon at 17.00 hours the Hearing of the Tribunal at 10.
00 hours.)
Official transcript of the International Military Tribunal, in the matter of:
1946, 1000-1245; Lord Justice Lawrence
CAPTAIN PRICEMAN: If it pleases your Honor, the Defendant Streicher and the Defendant Kaltenbrunner are absent this morning due to illness.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: May it please the Tribunal, before the Tribunal adjourned, I was dealing at the time with the share of the Defendant Neurath in the aggression against Austria. Before I proceed with the next stage, I should like the Tribunal, if it be so kind, to look at the original exhibit from which I will read, Document 3287-PS, and I would like to state it is Exhibit 128, which is the letter from this Defendant to Sir Neville Henderson, who was then the British Ambassador. The only point in which I would be grateful is if the Tribunal would note page 92 of the Document Book - When I say original, that is a certified copy certified by the British Foreign Office, but the Tribunal will see that the heading is from the President of the Secret Cabinet Council. That is the point that the Tribunal will remember. The question was raised as to the existence or activity of that body and the letterhead is from the Defendant in that capacity. occupation of Austria, this Defendant gave the assurance to M. Mastny, the Ambassador of Czechoslovakia to Berlin, regarding the continued independence of Czechoslovakia. That is one document at page 123, TC-27, which I have already put in as Exhibit GB-21. It was from Lord Halifax, who was then Foreign-Secretary; and if I may read the second paragraph just to remind the Tribunal of the circumstances in which it was written, M. Masaryk says:
"I have in consequence been instructed by my Government to bring to the official knowledge of His Majesty's Government the following facts: Yesterday evening (the 11th March) Field-Marshal Goering made two separate statements to M. Mastny, the Czechoslovak Minister in Berlin, assuring him that the developments in Austria will in no way have any detrimental influence on the relations between the German Reich and Czechoslovakia, and emphasising the continued earnest endeavor on the part of Germany to improve those mutual relations."
Goering, which have been brought to the Tribunal's attention, and I shall not do it again. The 6th paragraph begins: "M. Mastny was in a position to give him definite and binding assurances on this subject, that is, to give the Defendant Goering on the Czech mobilisation - and then it goes on: "and today spoke with Baron von Neurath, who, among other things, assured him on behalf of Herr Hitler that Germany still considers herself bound by the German-Czechoslovak Arbitration Convention concluded at Lorcarno in October 1925." the meeting on the 5th of November, four months previously, he had heard Hitler's views on Czechoslovakia, and that it was only six months before that really negotiated treaty was disregarded at once. That paragraph is, in my opinion, an excellent example on the technique of which this Defendant was the first professor.
I now come to the aggression against Czechoslovakia. On 28 May 1938 Hitler held a conference of important leaders including Beck, von Brauchitsch, Raeder, Keitel, Goering and Ribbentrop, at which Hitler affirmed that preparations should be made for military action against Czechoslovakia by October, and it is believed though not - I say frankly - confirmed that the Defendant von Neurath attended. The reference of that meeting is in the transcript of page 742 and 743.
THE PRESIDENT: Sir David, is there any evidence?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: No. Your Lordship will remember the documents, a long series of them, and it doesn't state who was present; therefore, I express that and put it with reserve. a member, enacted a new "Secret Reich Defense Law" which defined various official responsibilities in clear anticipation of war.