The deportation of labor to Germany and forced labor in Belgium have
already been explained to the Tribunal. It therefore seems unnecessary
to stress this point (Page 91). At the most, we should recall certain
consequences unfavorable to the Belgian economy. The measures concerning
the deportation of labor caused an economic disorganization and
weakening without precedent.
Secondly, the departure of workers and particularly of skilled workers
inadequately replaced by unskilled labor—women, adolescents and
pensioners—brought about a decrease in production at the same time as
an increase in the cost price, which contributed to complicating the
problem of the financial equilibrium of industrial enterprises.
Third observation: The requisition of labor was the cause of political
and social discontent owing to the dispersion of families and the
inequalities which appeared in the requisition of workers.
Fourth and last observation: The workers were required for spheres of
work which were not necessarily their own, which resulted in a loss of
their professional skill. Personnel were divided and unclassed. The
closing of artisan workshops brought about changes more or less felt in
certain branches of production. The losses thus suffered cannot be
measured in terms of money, but they are none the less important to be
submitted to your jurisdiction.
I have finished with this subject and will turn to a last chapter,
Chapter V, the acquisition of Belgian investments in foreign industrial
enterprises.
Since 1940 according to their general policy in all occupied countries
of Western Europe, the Germans concerned themselves with acquiring
shares in Belgian financial enterprises abroad. The official German
point of view emerges clearly from a letter dated 29 July 1941, from the
Minister of Finance to the Military Commander in Belgium. I have
submitted it under Number 187, in the document book (Document Number
RF-187).
This conception of the right to acquire shares is certainly very far
from the idea as laid down by the Hague Convention in respect to the
right of requisition. It clearly shows the German leaders’ determination
for enrichment at the expense of Belgium.
Thus, the Germans, since May 1940, sought to obtain influence in Belgian
holding companies. Not being able to violate directly international
laws, particularly Article 46 of the Hague Convention, they strove to
influence the members of the executive boards through persuasion rather
than by force.
In the course of a conference held on 3 May 1940 at the Reich Ministry
of Economics, dealing with Belgian and Dutch capital which it would
still be possible to acquire, it was decided that the Military Commander
in Belgium should take all necessary measures to prevent, on the one
hand, the destruction, transfer, sale, and illegal holding of all bonds
and stocks of these countries and, on the other hand, to induce Belgian
capitalists to hand over their foreign securities to the Germans. The
minutes of this conference are found in the document book under Number
RF-187 above.
To prevent the flight of any capital, an ordinance of 17 June 1940 was
promulgated, subjecting to authorization the sending abroad of any
securities and any acquisitions or disposal of foreign securities.
From 2 August 1940 the German leaders and the Defendant Göring himself
took a definite stand on this point. In the course of the general
remarks on economic plundering secret directives issued in this respect
by the Defendant Göring were read to you. It is the document submitted
under Number RF-105 (Page 97).
In spite of the German assurances and in spite of the wish of the
occupying power to preserve the appearance of regularity, the German
desire to absorb certain shares met with serious resistance. The
occupation authorities several times had to resort to compulsion to
conclude sales, in spite of the rights which they had reserved for
themselves in the above cited decree of 27 August 1940. This was
particularly the case with regard to the shares held by the Belgian
Metal Trust in the electrical enterprises of Eastern Silesia and, still
more clearly, the case regarding the shares of the Austrian Metal
Company, which at that time were wanted by the Hermann Göring Works.
The Belgian ill-will increased as the German determination to pillage
became more evident. In this report of 1 December 1942, Exhibit Number
RF-191 (Document Number ECR-132), the German Commissioner with the
National Bank very clearly denounces this resistance on the part of the
Belgian market. Almost all acquisitions which could be realized by the
Germans were settled by means of clearing (Page 98).
The balance of clearing capital credited to Belgium, to the amount of
1,000 million Belgian francs on 31 August 1944, represents a forced loan
imposed upon Belgium without any legal or logical relation to occupation
costs, unless it is the Germans’ will to hegemony.
Such a practice, contrary to the principles of international law and to
the rules of criminal law of civilized nations, falls under Article 6(b)
of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal and constitutes an
act of pillage of public or private property such as is envisaged in the
above-mentioned text.
Closely allied to the acquisition of shares and always within the
framework of legality, the levies made by the German authorities on
foreign, enemy, and Jewish property, should be pointed out to the
Tribunal.
As to foreign property seized by the Germans, it must be mentioned that
this measure was applied to French capital in Belgium in spite of
numerous protests by the French Government. As to Jewish property, for
the years 1943 and 1944, the figures are presented in Document Number
ECH-35 (Exhibit Number RF-192).
With this I conclude the presentation of the economic spoliation of
Belgium (Page 100).
The damage caused to Belgian economy in its principal branches have just
been submitted to the Tribunal. The statistical data have been taken
either from German reports or from official reports of the Belgian
Government. The available estimates and figures are not yet sufficiently
exact to fix the costs of war, the occupation and economic spoliation of
Belgium; some losses and damages cannot be expressed in money. Among
them, first of all, we must mention the privations resulting from the
German commandeering of a large part of food supplies and from the
particular situation of billeting and clothing. This purely material
aspect of the question should not cause us to overlook the consequences
of the occupation upon the public health (Page 103). For lack of
statistical data, it is difficult to show precisely the final state of
public health resulting from the particular circumstances.
One fact, however, must be remembered: The considerable increase in the
number of persons who were eligible for special invalid diets. This
number rose from 2,000 a month in 1941 to more than 25,000 a month in
1944. It had, therefore, increased more than tenfold, in spite of the
rationing measures which became more and more severe.
This increase in nutritional aid given to sick persons deserves the
attention of the Tribunal, less for itself and for its statistical
interest, than because it is the indication of the increase of disease
in Belgium. This increase is itself the result of the undernourishment
of the population during the four years of occupation.
This deplorable state of affairs, however, had not escaped the attention
of the occupation authorities, as appears from the letter of the
Military Commander in Belgium already quoted which is found in the
document book under Document Number RF-187:
“Regarding the food situation in Belgium, neither the minimum
for existence for the civilian population is secured nor the
minimum amount necessary for feeding heavy laborers who are
employed solely in the interest of the German war economy.”
I shall not dwell on this. This undernourishment of the Belgian
population has been the inevitable and the most serious result of the
huge levies made by the occupation authorities who willfully disregarded
the elementary requirements of an occupied country in order to pursue
only the war aims of the Reich.
The lowering of the average standard of health and the rise in the death
rate in Belgium from 1940 to 1945 may therefore be rightly considered
the direct result of the spoliations committed by the Germans in Belgium
in transgression of international law.