Immediately after the outbreak of the present war, the Belgian civil
population began a wild contest against the German troops, which
constitutes a flagrant violation of international law, and resulted in
the most serious consequences for Belgium and its people.
This struggle of a populace governed by the rudest passions raged
during the entire forward march of the German Army through Belgium.
When the Belgian Army had retired before the German troops, after
obstinate combats, the Belgian civil population in the unoccupied
parts of the country endeavoured to hinder the German advance by
every possible means; moreover, even in the places which had been
in possession of German troops for a long time, the inhabitants had
no hesitation in trying to damage and weaken the German forces by
cowardly and treacherous attacks. The full extent of this armed popular
resistance can be gauged from the accompanying sketch-map (App. 1),
wherein the German lines of advance and the Belgian places in which the
civilian fighting took place are marked. That along these routes and at
these places the Belgian civil population of every grade, age, and sex
took part with the greatest bitterness and fury in the fights against
the German troops can be proved from existing and weighty material,
supported by official documents containing the results secured by
examinations on oath and official reports. A selection from this
material is given in the various Appendices, which, however, only deal
with the most important events, and can be supplemented at any time by
further extracts. According to the accompanying material the Belgian
civil population fought against the German troops in many places in the
provinces of Liège (Apps. 2-10), Luxembourg (Apps. 11-30), Namur (Apps.
12, 17, 31-42), Hainault (Apps. 3, 7, 10, 40, 43-46, 49), Brabant
(Apps. 47-49), East and West Flanders (Apps. 49, 50). The fights were
of a particularly dreadful character in Aerschot, Andenne, Dinant, and
Louvain, and about these places special reports were delivered by
the Military Court of Examinations, instituted by the Ministry of War
for the purpose of inquiring into the violations of the laws of war
(Apps. A, B, C, D). According to these reports, men in all stations of
life--workmen, factory owners, doctors, teachers, even priests, not to
speak of women and children--were arrested with weapons in their hands
(Apps. 18, 20, 25, 27, 43, 47; A5; C18, 26, 29, 31, 41, 45, 48); in
districts from which the Belgian regular troops had long since retired
the Germans were fired on from houses and gardens, roofs and cellars,
fields and woods. In the fighting, methods were employed to which
regular troops would certainly not have resorted, and large quantities
of sporting-guns and ammunition, out-of-date revolvers and pistols
were also found (Apps. 6, 11, 13, 26, 36, 37, 44, 48, 49; A2; C52, 81;
D1, 2, 6, 20, 37); in consequence, there were numerous cases of wounds
caused by small-shot, and also by scalding with hot tar and boiling
water (Apps. 3, 10; B2; C5, 11, 28, 57; D25, 29). In view of all these
facts, there can be no doubt that the uprising in Belgium was not
undertaken by isolated civilians, but by large masses of the population.
The methods of fighting employed by the civilian population were
absolutely incompatible with the universally recognised rules of
international law, as laid down in Articles 1 and 2 of the Hague
Convention (Laws and Customs of War on Land), which had also been
accepted by Belgium. These rules differentiate between organised and
unorganised civilian warfare. In an organised People's War (Article
1) the militia and volunteer corps, in order to be recognised as
belligerents, must observe the four following regulations: They must
have responsible leaders at their head; they must wear a distinctive
badge, also visible at a distance; they must carry their weapons
openly; and must conform with the laws and usages of war. The
unorganised People's War (Article 2) need not fulfil the first two of
the above conditions, but must strictly adhere to the two latter ones:
it may only be carried on in territory not yet occupied by the enemy,
and only then if no time has been left to arrange for an organised
People's War.
The two special conditions laid down for organised civilian warfare
were certainly not carried out by the Belgian francs-tireurs, because
all the German military reports are unanimous in stating that the
civilians found fighting had no responsible leaders, and wore no
military badges (Apps. 6, 49; C4-7, 12, 15, 22, 24, 25, 31; D). The
Belgian francs-tireurs can therefore not be looked upon as organised
militia or volunteer corps according to the meaning of the laws of war.
The fact that apparently Belgian soldiers and members of the Garde
Civique also took part in their enterprises does not alter the case,
because, as these persons too did not wear military badges, but mingled
with the population in civilian dress (Apps. 6; A3; C25; D1, 30, 45,
46), they forfeited the rights of belligerents.
The whole of the Belgian People's War can therefore only be regarded
as an unorganised armed opposition of the civilian population. Being
as such only permissible in unoccupied territory, it was without
doubt absolutely against international law, when carried out in
places already in the possession of German troops, as, for instance,
in Aerschot, Andenne, and Louvain. But also in those places not yet
occupied by German troops unorganised civilian war was not permissible,
as the Belgian Government had had ample time to organise civilian
war in accordance with international law. The Belgian Government
had reckoned with the fact for many years, that in the event of an
outbreak of war between Germany and France they would be drawn into
the conflict; the preparations for their mobilisation were, as can
be proved, commenced at least a week before the entry of the German
troops. The Government were therefore in the position to provide those
members of the civilian population they proposed to make use of for
fighting purposes with military badges, and give them responsible
leaders. If the Belgian Government made known to the German Government
through the mediation of a neutral Power that they had taken the
necessary measures, this only proves that they were in a position to
comply with the conditions as laid down; in any case, however, such
steps were not taken in those parts of the country traversed by the
German troops.
The requirements of international law for an unorganised People's War
were, according to this, quite disregarded in Belgium, and, moreover,
it was carried on in a manner which alone would have sufficed to have
put those who participated in it outside the laws of war. For the
Belgian francs-tireurs regularly carried their weapons in a concealed
fashion, and failed to observe the laws and usages of war throughout.
On unimpeachable evidence it has been proved that, in a large number
of cases, the German troops were received by the inhabitants on their
arrival in an apparently friendly manner, and then, when darkness set
in, or some other opportunity presented itself, were surprised by an
armed attack; such cases occurred especially in Blegny, Esneux, Grand
Rosière, Bièvre, Gouvy, Villers devant Orval, Sainte-Marie, Les Bulles,
Yschippe, Acoz, Aerschot, Andenne, and Louvain (Apps. 3, 8, 11-13, 18,
22, 28, 31, 43; A, B, D). All these surprise attacks obviously offend
against the precept of international law that weapons are to be carried
openly.
The chief burden of blame which rests on the Belgian people is,
however, their unheard-of violation of the usages of war. In several
places, for instance Liège, Herve, Brussels, Aerschot, Dinant, and
Louvain, German soldiers were treacherously murdered (Apps. 18, 55,
61, 65, 66; A1; C56, 59, 61, 67, 73-78), which is absolutely against
the prohibition which forbids the "treacherous killing or wounding
of individuals belonging to the enemy people or army" (Article 23,
Section 1 (b) of the Hague Convention: The Laws and Customs of War on
Land). Further, the Belgian population did not respect the sign of
the Red Cross, and thereby offended against Article 9 of the Geneva
Convention of July 6th, 1906; in particular, they did not hesitate to
fire upon the German troops under the protection of this sign, and also
to attack hospitals in which there were wounded, as well as members of
the Ambulance Corps, while they were carrying out their duties (Apps.
3, 4, 12, 19, 23, 28, 29, 32, 41, 49; C9, 16-18, 32, 56, 66-70; D9, 21,
25-29, 38, 47). Finally, it is absolutely certain that German wounded
were plundered and killed by the Belgian population, and indeed in many
cases horribly mutilated; and that even women and young girls took
part in these shameful actions. In this way the eyes of German wounded
were torn out, ears, noses, fingers, and sexual organs cut off, or
their bodies slit open (Apps. 54-66; C73, 78; D35, 37); in other cases,
German soldiers were poisoned, hung on trees, deluged with burning
fluid or otherwise burnt, so that they died a particularly agonising
death (Apps. 50, 55, 63; C56, 59, 61, 67, 74-78). This bestial
behaviour on the part of the population is not only absolutely contrary
to the express obligation laid down in Article 1, Section 1 of the
Geneva Convention regarding the "respect and care of" the wounded and
sick of the enemy army, but also to the first principles of the laws of
war and humanity.
Under these circumstances, the Belgian civil population who took part
in the fights could of course make no claim to the treatment due to
belligerents. On the contrary, it was absolutely necessary for the
preservation of the German Army to have recourse to the sharpest
measures against these francs-tireurs. Individuals who fought against
the German troops had therefore to be cut down; prisoners could not
be treated as prisoners of war, according to the laws of war, but as
murderers. All the same, the forms of judicial procedure were complied
with, in so far as they were compatible with the necessities of war;
the prisoners were, when the circumstances permitted, only shot after
a hearing in accordance with the regulations, or after sentence by a
military court (Apps. 19, 20, 37, 40, 41, 43, 44, 48). Old men, women,
and children were spared to the widest extent, even when gravely
suspected (Apps. 49; C5, 6, 25, 26, 28, 31, 35, 41, 47, 79); and indeed
the German soldiers, although their patience was put to an extremely
hard test, looked after such people, whenever possible, sometimes in
the most self-sacrificing manner, taking the helpless under their
protection when in danger, sharing their bread with them, bringing the
sick and weak to places where they could be cared for (Apps. C45, 47,
51-53, 55, 58, 80-86).
That the Belgian Government are largely to blame for the illegal
attitude of their population towards the German Army is indisputable.
For apart from the fact that a Government has, under all circumstances,
to bear the responsibility for actions of this kind, which are the
expression of the popular will, the serious accusation must be made
against them that they did not put an end to this guerilla war,
although they could have done so (Apps. 33, 51-53; D42, 43, 48).
It would certainly have been easy for them to give the necessary
instructions to their officials, such as the Burgomasters, members of
the Garde Civique, and the soldiers, in order to check the passionate
excitement of the people, which had been artificially aroused.
Therefore the full responsibility for the terrible blood-guiltiness
which rests upon Belgium must be attached to the Belgian Government.
The Belgian Government have made the attempt to free themselves from
this responsibility by attributing blame for the occurrences to the
destructive rage of the German troops, who are said to have committed
deeds of violence without any reason. They have appointed a Commission
for the investigation of the alleged German outrages, and have made
the findings of this Commission the subject of diplomatic complaint.
This attempt to pervert the facts has failed utterly. The German Army
is accustomed to make war only against hostile armies, and not against
peaceful inhabitants. The incontestable fact that from the commencement
a defensive struggle was forced on the German troops in the interests
of self-protection by the population of the country cannot be argued
away by the investigations of any Commission.
The narratives of fugitives gathered together by the Belgian
Commission, which are characterised as being the result of scrupulously
impartial investigations, bear the stamp of untrustworthiness, if not
of malicious misrepresentation. In view of the existing conditions
the Commission was not in a position to test the correctness of the
reports brought before it, or to grasp the connection of events. Their
accusations against the German Army are therefore nothing but low
calumnies, which cannot stand before the documentary evidence possessed
by us.
The struggle of the German troops with the civil population of Aerschot
did not arise because German officers attacked the honour of the
Burgomaster's family, as is suggested on the Belgian side, but on
account of a well-thought-out attack on the Commanding Officer of the
place by the civil population, who treacherously murdered him (App.
A). At Dinant it was not innocent, peaceful inhabitants who fell
victims to the German arms, but murderers, who treacherously attacked
German soldiers, and in this way involved the troops in a struggle
which destroyed the city (App. C). In Louvain the fight with the civil
population did not arise because fleeing German troops were involved
by mistake in hand-to-hand contests with their comrades who were
entering the town, but because a deluded population, unable to grasp
the course of events, thought they could destroy the returning German
soldiers without danger (App. D). Moreover in Louvain, as in other
towns, the burning torch was only applied by German troops when bitter
necessity demanded it. The plan of the destruction of Louvain (App.
50) shows clearly how the troops confined themselves to destroying
only those parts of the city in which the inhabitants opposed them in
a treacherous and murderous manner. It was indeed German troops who
took care, whenever possible, to save the artistic treasures, not only
of Louvain, but of other towns; a special German Commission has shown
to what a large extent German troops protected the art treasures of
Belgium.
The Imperial German Government believe that by the publication of
the material contained in this work they have proved in a convincing
manner that the action of the German troops against the Belgian civil
population was provoked by the illegal guerilla war, and was required
by the necessities of war. On the other hand, they level a solemn and
emphatic protest against a population which has, by the most despicable
means, waged a dishonourable war against the German soldiers and still
more against a Government which, in complete perversion of its duties,
gave rein to the senseless passions of the population, and now does
not scruple to endeavour to free itself from its own heavy guilt by
mendacious libels upon the German Army.
BERLIN, _May 10th, 1915_.