“The population . . . is without leadership. It stands apart and
feels that we look down on it, that we see sabotage in their
tempo and methods of work, that we do not take any steps to find
a way to an understanding.”
A similar document is the document submitted as Exhibit Number USSR-439,
which was graciously given to us by our United States colleagues. It was
registered by the American Prosecution as Document Number 303-PS, but
was not filed. It is a political report of the German professor, Doctor
Paul W. Thomsen, written on the forms of the State University of Posen
Biological Paleontological Institute and was indexed by the author
himself, “Not for publication.” Your Honors will find this document on
Page 116 of the document book. This document also introduces us into
this field of complete lawlessness and tyrannical arbitrariness toward
the local population of the temporarily occupied districts of the Soviet
Union. These observations were made by this fascist professor during his
trip through the temporarily occupied territories of the Soviet Union
“from Minsk to the Crimea.”
I refer to two short excerpts from this document. The quotation which I
have read into the record testifies to the absence of any humanitarian
tendencies on the part of that author and if Paul Thomsen brought back
from his trip only “the most depressing impression” that is only further
proof of the depths of cruelty and brutality to which the German
fascists were willing to go. The Tribunal will find these excerpts on
Page 116 of the document book. I begin the quotation. . .
THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn now.
[_The Tribunal adjourned until 26 February 1946 at 1000 hours._]
SIXTY-EIGHTH DAY
Tuesday, 26 February 1946
_Morning Session_
THE PRESIDENT: I wanted to explain the Tribunal’s decision with
reference to General Halder and General Warlimont.
Would Dr. Nelte kindly come to the Tribunal?
I wanted to ask you, Dr. Nelte, whether you were the only one of the
defendants’ counsel who wished to call General Halder and General
Warlimont?
DR. NELTE: No, besides myself, so far as I know, my colleagues Dr.
Laternser, Professor Dr. Kraus, and Professor Dr. Exner have called both
General Halder and General Warlimont.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, I understand.
Then the Tribunal’s decision is this: The Tribunal ordered, when the
Soviet prosecutor wished to put in the affidavits of these two generals,
that if they were put in, the witnesses must be produced for
cross-examination. But in view of the fact that defendants’ counsel have
asked to call these witnesses themselves, the Tribunal is willing that
the defendants’ counsel should decide whether they prefer that those two
generals should be produced now, during the Prosecution’s case, for
cross-examination, or should be called thereafter during the defendants’
case for examination by the defendants, in which case, of course, they
would be liable to cross-examination on behalf of the Prosecution.
But it must be clearly understood, in accordance with the order which
the Tribunal made the other day—either yesterday or the previous day, I
forgot which it was—that these witnesses, like other witnesses, can
only be called once, and when they are called, each of the defendants’
counsel who wishes to put questions to them must do so at that time.
Now, if there were any difference of opinion among defendants’ counsel,
one defendant’s counsel wishing to have these two generals produced now
during the Prosecution’s case for cross-examination, and other
defendants’ counsel wishing to have them called hereafter as witnesses
on their behalf during the course of their case, then the Tribunal
consider that in view of the order which they have already made,
Generals Halder and Warlimont ought to be produced and called now. And
the same rule would apply then. They could only be called once, and any
questions which the other defendants’ counsel wish to be put to them
should be put to them then. But the decision as to whether they should
be called now or whether they should be called during the course of the
defendants’ case is accorded to defendants’ counsel.
Is that clear?
DR. NELTE: I request to hear the decisions of the various Defense
Counsel at the beginning of the afternoon session. . .
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, certainly, certainly. You can let us know during the
afternoon session, at the beginning of the afternoon session, what the
decision of defendants’ counsel is.
DR. NELTE: Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Colonel Smirnov.
MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: I continue the quotation of the political report
of Professor Paul Thomsen, which was already submitted at yesterday’s
afternoon session to the Tribunal. Your Honors will find it on Page 116
of the document book. I start quoting—and quote only two short excerpts
from this political report:
“I consider it is my duty, although I am only here in the East
on a specific scientific mission, to add a general political
outline to my actual reports. I must admit, openly and in all
honesty, that I return home with the most grievous impressions.
“In this fateful hour of our nation every mistake we make may
result in the most disastrous consequences. A Polish or a Czech
problem can be crushed because the biological forces of our
people are sufficient for that purpose.
“Remnants of people like Estonians, Lithuanians, and Letts have
to adapt themselves to us or they will perish. Things are quite
different in the immense Russian area, of vital necessity to us
as a basis for raw materials.”
Here I interrupt my quotation and continue on Page 117 of the document
book, Paragraphs 10 and 11—I quote:
“I do not dare to voice an opinion on the economic measures,
such as, for instance, the abolition of the free market in Kiev,
which has been taken as a heavy blow by the population, since I
am in no position to observe the entire situation. The ‘sergeant
major attitude,’ the beatings and shouting in the streets, the
senseless destruction of scientific institutions which is still
going on as strong as ever in Dniepropetrovsk, should cease
immediately and be punished severely.
“Kiev, 19 October 1942; Professor Dr. Paul W. Thomsen.”
The German fascist theory of Germanization, already well known to the
Tribunal, announced that not the people but the territories were to be
germanized.
I shall submit evidence to the Tribunal that a similar Hitlerite crime
was to have been committed in Yugoslavia. This crime could not be
perpetrated because of the liberation movement which flared up all over
Yugoslavia.
I quote a short excerpt from the statement of the Yugoslav Government,
which is on Page 68, Paragraph 7 in the document book:
“Immediately after the entry of the German troops into Slovenia,
the Germans began to put into effect their long premeditated
plan for the Germanization of the annexed regions of Slovenia.
It was perfectly clear to the leading Nazi circles that a
successful Germanization of Slovenia could not be realized
unless the greater part of the nationally and socially conscious
elements had previously been removed; and in order to weaken the
resistance of the mass of the people towards the Nazi
authorities engaged in the task of Germanization, it would be
essential to lessen them numerically and destroy them
economically.
“The German plan foresaw the complete removal of all the
Slovenes from certain regions of Slovenia, and their
repopulation by Germans”—Germans from Bessarabia and so-called
“Gottscheer” Germans.”