It was by no means the case that the population was only afraid of the occupation forces. They were at least as much afraid of the Communist partisans, and that is even the case today down there.
Q. Isn't the fact that there was forced recruiting by the partisans, General Lanz, an indication of how strong the partisans really were and how large an area they really did control?
A. Could you repeat the question again, please?
Q. Isn't the fact that there was forced recruiting by the partisans an indication that they had many of the-- that they resembled in many respects a regular state and that it indicates precisely how large an area the partisans controlled?
A. It is an indication for the fact how ruthless and fresh the partisans were and that they did not shy away from any means that they could take against their own fellow citizens. If we gained knowledge of the fact that somewhere in an isolated area such measures had been taken by the partisans, then we ordered and carried out operations against these partisans. I have repeatedly mentioned such operations on examination here.
Q. Isn't General Stettner saying here in paragraph 1c, General Lanz, that German reprisal measures, the burning of villages, in fact increasing the number of recruits which went to the partisans?
A. I beg your pardon, I will have to look at the text again for a minute.
Q. It is on page 150 of your volumen.
A. Thank you very much. Yes, this is a measure which I believe he wanted to take for the protection and in the interests of the population. He did not want to expose the population to the possibility that it should further come under the pressure of the partisans. I read from this a certain consideration for the population.
Q. He is also saying, is he not, General Lanz, that by burning villages, the population, which fears German reprisal measures, is joining up with the partisans?
A. He believes that the partisans forced the population to participate in their operation as a result of these measures.
Q. General Lanz, how many hostages would you say were executed in your corps area during the time that you were in command in Greece?
A. Well, that is a very difficult question. It is impossible for me to answer this question with any amount of exactness and, Mr. Fenstermacher I have no information or documents on which to base my answer. It is not very advisable to take just any figure and mention it here.
Q. Well, General Lanz, incidents of that kind were reported to you, were they not? You were the Commanding General of the Corps; you must have known what was going on within your area.
A. I believed that I know that along general lines, but I would like to stress again that today one seems to think that the Commanding General had to think only about hostage measures. That is seeing things upside down. That was not my main task. I had other tasks which were more important than this hostage question. Of course, I took an interest also in that, especially when these facts reached my knowledge, but my tactical tasks occupied the greatest part of my time. That would be the same with any general in any army.
Q. Can't you hazard an approximation of the number of hostages which were executed within your Corps area?
A. Since I have no indication and no basis on which I could base such a figure, I would like to refrain from doing this. I could only hazard a guess and I don't think that is advisable.
Q. Doesn't your memory help you on this point, General Lanz? Must you always have documents?
A. I have mentioned during my examination a few dates which I knew and they are known to the prosecution to the extent to which they arc contained in the documents so that I don't believe I have to make any further statements here. I don't think you would need such a statement. Any other incidents which I have not yet mentioned are not known to me.
Q. Would you look at this document, General Lanz, NOKW-1833. This is offered as prosecution Exhibit 619, your Honors. There will be occasion to refer to this document from time to time, your Honors. I would suggest therefore, that it be paginated from page one through page eight Will you turn, General Lanz, to page five of the document which you have, page four of your Honors' document--this is a daily report, General Lanz, which your Corps sent to your superior office, Army Group E, for the 12th of December, 1943.
You will note the last paragraph of the report states that "At noon on 12 December 1943 a nationalist leader was killed by a hand-grenade in the street in Corca. As reprisal measures, five hostages were shot and several houses were destroyed in the vicinity of the place of the occurrence."
Do you remember this occasion on which five hostages were shot for the death of one nationalist leader?
A. I don't remember that incident.
Q. Do you believe that your Ic or your Ia reported the incident to you at the time?
A. That is possible but I am not in a position to say that for certain. That would depend on the fact of whether or not I was in Joannina on that day. I might have been away from the town which happened quite frequently. Therefore, I cannot answer your question. At least, I don't remember that particular incident, not even now when I am reading it.
Q. Would you look at this document, General Lanz, NOKW-1827? This is offered as prosecution Exhibit 620, your Honors. This, General Lanz, is a report from the 1st Mountain Division for the 24 October 1943, and you will note the receipt stamp of your Corps on the first page. It talks about the political situation first.
"The Greek population has not changed essentially its attitude toward the German occupation forces. The reprisal measures commenced at the beginning of the month on account of the increased bandit raids have intimidated the population considerably, but on the other hand have raised the regard" for the Wehrmacht, since it became clear that the German Wehrmacht, in contrast to the Italians previously, took appropriate counter-measures at once."
Would you say that your reprisal measures were more severe than those which the Italians had previously taken?
A. In any event, the 1st Mountain Division believed that the measures taken by the 1st Mountain Division were more effective than those taken by the Italians. That is what I gather from the text of the document issued by the 1st Mountain Division; furthermore, I would like to remark that this enemy situation report arrived at my corps but it was not submitted to me. Otherwise, it would have been initialed by me because all those documents which I saw and which got to my office I signed in my initials. I can therefore not even say that I gained knowledge of this report.
Q. And your Ic would inform you of matters of this kind, would he not, General Lanz. Wasn't that precisely his duty.
A. Principally what you say is correct, that it is his duty to inform me, but it is also a question how such a matter would be reported to me. Such a report can be submitted in the most various manners and it all depends on what he actually tells me and that just is what I no longer recall. All I can say for certain is that the document such as we have it in front of us now was not submitted to me at the time. Otherwise, I would have initialed it.
Q. Will you look at paragraph six of the document, General Lanz, on the second page of the original? It says there:
"The activity at the end of the last and the beginning of this month has subsided considerably, since the shooting of 58 hostages for a surprise attack on German soldiers was carried out."
Do you remember the execution of those 58 hostages?
A. Yes, Mr. Fenstermacher, and that is one case which I expressly mentioned during my examination. I even stressed during my examination that this concerns one incident which the Greeks mention in their indictment. This document is contained in Document Book 19. I am afraid I don't know the page by heart.
It is a report of the Third Battalion/99, that is correct. But still it is the report which was not passed on to me. I received a report which described the fights in that area and which says literally 50 enemy dead under the reports of lives lost.
I therefore don't know for sure whether intentionally at that time I was shown this text so that I should not interfere with procedures. In the report, however, it says 50 enemy dead 10 wounded. If I read such a report in connection with something which is obviously a combat action, I can see no cause immediately to assume that this could possibly concern 50 hostages. That must be granted. I am talking about conditions as they prevailed then.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will be in recess until nine-thirty tomorrow morning.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 26 November 1947 at 0930 hours.)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America against Wilhelm List, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 26 November 1947, 0930, Judge Burke presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal V. Military Tribunal V is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal. There will be order in the courtroom.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, will you ascertain if all the defendants are present in the court?
THE MARSHAL: May it please your Honor, all the defendants are present in the court with the exception of defendant von Weichs who is in the hospital.
THE PRESIDENT: Judge Burke will preside at this day's session.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: You may continue, Mr. Fenstermacher.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Thank you, your Honor.
HUBERT LANZ - Resumed CROSS EXAMINATION (Continued) BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:
Q General Lanz, yesterday afternoon before we discontinued we were looking at Document NOKW -1827 which is Prosecution Exhibit 620. In paragraph 6 of that document there is a reference to the shooting of 56 hostages for a surprise attack on German soldiers. Do you recall that incident?
A Will you excuse me a minute? Paragraph 6 is paragraph "b" in my copy. Is that right? Thank you.
I believe that yesterday I commented on that incident. This incident became known to me through the documents which I was shown a few weeks ago. The incident is described in Document Book XIX. I am afraid I can't give you the exact page. It is somewhere around 132. I have made statements here about that case while on direct examination. It is a report of the 3rd Battalion 99.
Q General Lanz, are you referring now to the evening report of 29 September which is on page 132 of the German Document Book.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: And 110 of the English, your Honors.
Q Is that -
A That is the one I am having reference to.
Q That, General Lanz, refers to 50 Greeks being shot and it is apparently on or about 29 September whereas this report, Exhibit 620, refers to the shooting of 58 hostages and it is a situation report for almost a month later, on the 22nd of October 1943.
Do you believe that they both relate to the same incident?
A I am certain that it is the same. It says in the text here that the shooting of 58 hostages as a reprisal for an attack was carried out and this again concerns a surprise attack on a reconnaissance unit. It is the same district which is striking the district of Paramythia and I am not quite sure whether 50 and 58 is not a misprint the 8 would be a zero. I think that is quite possible.
Q How do you explain that the 58 hostages report is almost a month after the report which refers to 50 Greeks having been shot?
A I assume that it is a situation report which was written concerning a certain period of time and in which a survey is given over a certain period of time. That is, this is my explanation.
Q Exhibit 620, General Lanz, says it is a situation report for the 22nd of October 1943. That appears on the first page of the document you have.
A If I may give my explanation to this, the situation report was concluded on the 22nd of October. That is the last day of the report. That is the date up to which the situation report surveys the situation but such reports, according to experiences made, always cover a certain period over which they are written. That is my own explanation and this is how I take this incident here. I don't happen to know of the case and it is rather striking that it concerns almost the same figure and I assume actually the same figure, in the same area, for the same reason. That brings me to the conclusion that the same incident must be involved in the same cases.
Q Now will you turn to page 148 in Document Book XIX?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Page 136 in the English, your Honors.
A 136?
Q 148 in the German.
A I see.
Q Now you note that the file notes for the commanding general are dated October 18, 1943, just a few days before the 22nd of October to which date exhibit of 620 refers and you will note under paragraph "c", under "Paramythia," the figure "58."
Now as a reprisal measure for 6 murdered German soldiers it would appear that this "58" refers to the 58 hostages which are mentioned in the situation report of the 1st Mountain Division.
Do you recall this latter incident now or not, that reprisal for six murdered German soldiers?
A I see this entry here and I have made statements here about this file note and I believe what I expressed was that I had the matter clarified on the basis of the file note. At that time I commissioned my Ic to clear up the matter on the basis of the file note and I stated this here in this courtroom. I assume you remember that.
Q Do you believe, then, that these 58 hostages either were never shot or that they were shot in combat? Is that your explanation?
A The causes and circumstances which led to the measure are not known to me. I gather from the wording here that as a reprisal measure for six murdered German soldiers the 1st Mountain Division shot these 58 people.
Q Do you believe -
A The incident in its details is not known to me.
Q Do you believe that the execution of 58 hostages in reprisal for 6 German soldiers is an unusually high ratio?
A I don't know the details and the circumstances under which the six German soldiers were murdered and I believe that these circumstances would have played an important part for the ratio taken in the reprisal.
This is a ratio which is not quite one to ten. This is what I am gathering from the text in front of me.
Q Do you consider a ratio of one to ten particularly high?
A I am afraid I cannot make any comments of a basic nature on this subject. The measures taken will always have to depend on the circumstances under which the losses occurred. I don't believe that one can comment in any way mentioning principles in this connection. I believe I mentioned yesterday that I know that on the part of the Allies the ratio one to ten existed and was carried out.
Q How do you know that, General Lanz?
A How do you mean that?
Q How do you know that the Allies had a ratio of one to ten for the execution of hostages?
A I know that from a document which I believe will be submitted and I know of an incident which confirms this and which will also be mentioned in the later course of these trials.
Q. Will you turn now, General Lanz, to page 135 of the German Document Book XIX, Page 115 of the English, Your Honors. I believe your explanation of the reference here, General Lanz, to four hostages' having been immediately shot as a reprisal for the attack on your convoy going to the funeral of Regimental Commander Salminger was that these people were not really hostages, but they were actually bandits dressed in civilian clothes, who were killed in the course of the attack on the convoy.
A. In this report we have a different wording from the report which comes soon afterwards on Page 136, where not hostages but four civilians are mentioned. I am of the opinion that these were partisans who participated in the surprise attack. And it has nowhere been established, nor was it possible for me to establish anywhere that these four hostages were actually shot.
Q. Now, if you'll look at that report which mentions that four civilians have been shot, on page 133 of the German Document and page 117, Your Honors, it states there that counter measures in progress up to now four civilians shot to death. In the previous report it states that four hostages were immediately shot and that further reprisal measures were being carried out. Are you quite sure that the reference to four civilians' having been shot to death as counter measure did not refer to an additional four persons who were shot? That is to say, that the four hostages were shot immediately and then, as part of the counter measures which were reported, four civilians were later shot.
A. I believe that the same persons are concerned in both reports. At least it is rather striking that the figure "4" is the same in both reports. The assumption could be drawn that the same people are involved in both reports.
Q. Why do you suppose it says "as counter measures four civilians were shot?" If it meant that four civilians were shot during the course of combat wouldn't the report have said just that?
A. If after this surprise attack we took measures against the partisans, that amounts to a counter measure. It is, so to speak, a reaction to the action taken by the partisans, it is a counter measure, a counter measure following a measure taken by the enemy.
Q. General Lanz, the First Mountain Division knew what a hostage was didn't it? Why do you suppose that the report says "hostages" if "civilians" engaged in combat were meant?
A. I believe that the terms in this sharp differentiation, as they have been worked out in the case of this so-called hostage case, did not exist at that time in the minds of the men who would draw up such a report. Of course I don't know who drew up this particular report. It may have been only a clerk who did it. It may not even have been an officer. I don't know whether, at that time, the term "hostage" was so sharply distinguished from the term "civilian", as great emphasis is attached to it today which was not done at that time. In that band war the majority of the opponents concerned were civilians, and the concept of a "civilian" is very closely related, seen from those days, to the concept of a "hostage." I don't therefore, believe that the differentiation was made in the legal sense at that time as it is being made here today.
Q. Would you say, then, that when the reports referred to civilians' being shot it is possible that in those cases "hostages" were meant? Mere the terms "hostage" and "civilian" used interchangeably in your reports?
A. Today, of course, I am no longer in a position to establish how this was actually handled. It is not possible for me to do that because I was not the man who drew up such reports. But if one knows how such reports used to come about, then one would see the possibility for the fact that "civilians" were sometimes termed "hostages," even if they did not happen to be hostages. All I meant to say is that these sharp legal differentiations which came out here in the course of these proceedings must not be supposed as having existed at that time.
What strikes me in the report is that the same figure appears in a very short interval, and that in the second case civilians are mentioned. Since I did not know anything about a hostage shooting in that connection, let alone ordered one, the conclusion is fairly obvious that the civilians concerned were partisans who participated in the attack and were involved in the fighting near the spot of the attack. That is a conclusion which seems more or less obvious.
Q. General lanz, what did your Ia report on an incident of this kind to Higher Headquarters so that Higher Headquarters might know exactly what happened? Did you report that civilians were shot or that hostages were shot in the course of combat? How were incidents reported in the course of your reports?
A. If the report had been submitted to me before having been dispatched I suppose that I would have attempted to get at the bottom of the affair, and I would have ordered the facts to be established exactly.
Q. Well, this report was, in fact, given to you, General Lanz, because it was an attack on your convoys. Do you remember asking whether hostages had been shot or whether there had been a combat action in which civilians were killed?
A. I would like to say that this incident took place when I was enroute. I was on an official trip from which I returned only two or three days later. I stated that I went to Salminger's funeral in Privisa and then I went to Agrinion to the 104th Division. In either of these two places, it was reported to me that an attack on my convoy had taken place.
Q. As a matter of fact, General Lanz, your Corps reported to Army Group # that four hostages had been shot. Will you look at Document NOKW1831? This is offered as Prosecution Exhibit No. 621, Your Honors, that it be paginated from Page 1 through Page 10. It appears on Page 9 of the original document, General Lanz.
The reference here, Your Honors, is on Page 9 of the document which has been distributed.
A. On Page 6 is it? Or was it Page 9?
Q. I believe it's on Page 9 of the original document, General Lanz. It's a Corps report of the XXIInd Mountain Corps, for the 3rd of October 1943.
A. It's so poorly printed that I can hardly read it.
Q. Can one assume, General Lanz, that your Ia investigated the incident and ascertained that it was, in fact, hostages which were shot?
A. One can assume that, or one cannot assume it. A long time later it is difficult to say anything with certainty. The report has been received from the First Mountain Division. At the time it was the first report about this incident. It was then -- I believe while I was absent on an official trip -- passed on by my staff. I would assume that is how the facts were.
Q. I think we can leave that document now, General Lanz, and turn now to Page 156 in the German Document Book. Page 147 in the English, Your Honors. As you will note there in Paragraph 4, a request from the battalion . . .
A. Can you give me the page again, please?
A. Page 156 in your Document Book; Page 147 in the English. You will note there, General Lanz, that Battalion 79 is asking whether eight hostages held for the murder of the interpreter might be hanged. Later on, on Page 163 of your Document Book, Page 153 of the English, there is an indication that reprisals for the interpreter were carried out. Did you ever hear about the execution of these eight hostages?
A. To the best of my recollection I read about the incident in the documents here, in the report which you're having reference to. This report was sent to the First Mountain Division at that time.
Q. Were these prisoner hostages, in fact, or were they civilians who might possibly have been executed in the course of a combat action?
A. I'm afraid I cannot make any comments here on the basis of what I find in the document book. That is the only indication I have about the incident at all.
Q. Can't you make an assumption on the basis of what you see here?
A. It's possible that reprisal prisoners were, at that time, executed as a reprisal for the murder of the interpreter. That is possible. I cannot say it with any certainty because I did not issue such a directive, and to the best of my knowledge I only found reports about this incident in the documents here; therefore, I can only make an assumption because I was not the person who ordered this measure.
Q. What did you mean by "reprisal prisoners?"
A. It is possible when we consider that band-suspect civilians, lived in the vicinity of the place where the murder took place, and that it was made known at that time that hostages were to be executed if further such attacks took place, and that after this interpreter incident has occurred the execution was actually carried out. I would think that is possible, but, as I have said, I can only make an assumption.
Q. Do you believe that the hostages mentioned here were, in fact, bandit-suspects?
A. I said that is an assumption; it is a possibility. I cannot represent it as a certainty since I only heard of this case here.
Q. General Lanz, who was Commander of German Troops in the Epirus section of Greece in May of 1943--rather May of 1944?
A. Could you repeat the question please? (The court interpreter repeats the question.)
In May, 1944, I was the man. In May, 1943 it was an Italian.
Q. Now, would you look at this document, Document NOKW-1987? This is offered as Prosecution Exhibit No. 622, Your Honors. You say here, General Lanz, in what apparently is a proclamation, that in reprisal for various band attacks "an operation against the locality of Pogonion and further operations in the area there are taking place, shortly. The male population of Pogonion is to be seized as hostages and brought to Joannina."
How far from Pogonion was Joannina?
A. Approximately 40 km.
Q. And then you continue, "If a surprise attack on German troops between Elea and Kakavi takes place again, a large number of hostages will be shot as a reprisal measure."
Do you recall this proclamation?
A. I recall this incident, and I can make a supplementary comment to this proclamation.
Approximately two days later Pogonion was occupied by German troops, to the best of my knowledge without any fighting, and on this occasion 18 persons were arrested as suspects. Presumably they were sent to Joannina to the prisoner collecting point. A report exists about this fact which might possibly be known to you.
Q. How large was the male population of Pogonion?
A. I'm afraid it's not possible for me to say that. I don't know.
Q. Now, you say here that "a large number of hostages will be shot." What did you mean by "a large number?"
A. I stated just now that this is a proclamation, or, if you like to put it that way, it's a threat or a warning. What happened is, as I said, is that 18 persons were arrested as suspects in Pogonion. These persons, not contained in the other report, were presumably brought to Joannina to the prisoner collecting point. Whether or not 18 people can be considered a large number is an individual opinion. One can judge that in his own way. I did not know anything whether or not any one of these 18 people was shot. Unless you have a document which you can give me concerning this fact. I know nothing about it.
Q. General Lanz, if you had German troops stationed in Pogonion why couldn't they guard the hostages instead of sending the hostages 40 Km away to Joannina?
A. I would like to point out that in the report which I have reference to and which is dated two days after the proclamation it is merely stated that 18 people were brought to Joannina. That is an assumption, or a guess, which I made on the basis of the proclamation in front of me. It doesn't have to be a fact. I'm not sure. Possibly those 18 persons remained in Pogonion. I don't know. In Joannina there was the prisoner collecting point, and it is possible that these prisoners were brought there. I think that is possible, but I'm in no position to say it with certainty. I don't consider the whole incident as of great material importance.
Q. General Lanz, several of your affiants have said in their affidavits that no hostages were shot within the Corps area. Do you agree with what they have said?
A. I can, of course, always subscribe to the opinion expressed by other people. Furthermore, I don't know what these people actually knew, and it is not possible for me to establish that. Certainly it is not possible in the position in which I find myself. I am not aware that in accordance with one of my orders hostages were shot. That is not known to me.
Q. Were hostages shot within your Corps area, General Lanz?
A. I consider it possible that they were shot, but I want to state that I did not know that they were shot in accordance with any of my orders.
Q. Whether or not you gave any orders for the execution of hostages, do you know that, in fact, hostages were shot within your Corps area?
A. I gather today, from the files, possibly in surveying these documents, more than I knew at that time. I get, so to speak, the account of the whole year which I spent down there, with special emphasis on these particular matters. I believe, Mr. Fenstermacher, that at that time to me the situation was slightly different. I have to comment on that in more detail in order to arrive at a factual evaluation of the situation at that time. It was in the nature of things that, at that time, which we evaluate so many years later, certain affairs were to me of a different important than is being given them here now. It is possible that at that time, in individual and specific cases, the shooting of hostages was reported to me. At this moment I do not recall any such reports, which is not possible either, considering the abundance of events of the time. Furthermore, it is possible that, at that time, I did not attach as much importance to those matters as is being given them today. I would only like to relate here the impression of the events such as I had at that time when they took place, and that could be of a greater importance for any judgment.
Q. Let's turn now, General Lanz, to band warfare, The methods which the bands used in their attacks upon German troops. I believe you said that many of these attacks on your troops were made at night. They were made from ambush, and a good deal of them were surprise attacks. Now if the bands were in fact legal belligerents, would you have considered the methods of their attacks unlawful?
A. I believe that the illegality of the method of warfare pursued by the bands is mainly based on the fact that the opponent facing us did not correspond with the provisions of international law.
Q. You didn't object to the manner in which he attacked your troops. That is to say, you found nothing wrong with attacking at night or in surprise or from ambush?
A. I would like to comment on that, if I may. The method in which the bands waged war was a method which was not customary in soldierly usage, especially so through the fact that these bands restricted themselves exclusively to a surprise attack and sabotage acts. Of course, even during normal warfare, there are such things as night fighting and surprise attacks at night but they don't exist exclusively in a normal warfare and that was the characteristic of the band method of warfare that they exclusively consisted in such surprise attacks and sabotage acts.
Q. If the bands were legal belligerents, General Lanz, and they exclusively resorted to guerialla type of attacks, would you have considered those attacks unlawful or unsoldierly/?
A. I believe that the illegality of the partisans cannot merely be judged in accordance with their method of warfare, although this method of warfare quite obviously violated provisions, for instance, of the Geneva Conventions which has been proved.
Q. Did you know, General Lanz, when you took over command in Greece in September '43 that from July 1943 all of the bands---that is the EDES and the ELAS Greek bands were subordinate to the Allied Middle East Command?