Q Witness, I didn't ask you how many dead you had in the last hour but I asked you, do you actually know anything about the fact that General Zervas informed General Lanz as to what regions would be evacuated by the German troops within the next few days. The witness can answer the question with either a yes or no.
A No, of course.
Q Do you know that during those negotiations General Zervas proposed to General Lanz that Lanz, together with his troops, should desert to Zervas, that he, Lanz, and his troops would be decently treated and that they would then be committed as police troops?
A The things as quoted by Mr. Defense Counsel are exactly a distortion of the terms as written by me on the 9th of September in the evening in the office of General Zervas and presented to them.
Q Therefore, you know nothing about such a proposal. Answer this question yes or no?
A There was no such proposal.
Q Another question, do you know that General Lanz, before his withdrawal from Jannina gave considerable amount of food and other stocks to the population and International Red Cross?
A Yes, that is known to me.
Q Do you also know that during the withdrawal of the German troops from Jannina the Mayor of that town, a Bishop, expressed the gratitude of the population to General Lanz for the good will with which General Lanz treated the population of the town?
A Both the Mayor and the Bishop were trembling with fear thinking that the Germans might actually put their threats into effect whereby they would blow up all the city and they may have thanked them for not blowing it up.
Q How does the witness know that?
A The way I know about it was that when I asked them how they dared to thank their invaders they told us they had witnesses to prove what had happened. The witnesses were, at least the name of one, was Konstantopoulos.
Q Witness, don't you know that the Mayor of Jannina in front of a large crowd of people told General Lanz when he left if General Lanz would ever return to the Balkans he would at any time be able to enjoy the hospitality of Jannina, and at this very same occasion the Mayor told General Lanz that the town of Jannina was very grateful to General Lanz for his solicitude?
A I don't know if he used those words but I know he spoke and I know why he spoke.
Q Well, what did he say?
A I don't know exactly what he said but when we entered the city we heard that the mayor had spoken to Lanz and we wanted to know what he had said and the reason for doing so.
A Witness, is it correct that in leaflets and in newspapers frequent approaches were made to General Zervas that he had collaborated with the Germans and is it correct that because of this charge General Zervas even at that time was very severely attacked from various leaflets?
Q The fact as is shown by those attacks and it seems from the sources those attacks came from, it is definite proof that General Zervas was the only and real opponent of the Germans in Greece.
BY JUDGE BURKE:
Q I think the question was somewhat differently framed. The question in the first instance: Were such attacks in truth and in fact made on General Zervas by the leftist organizations?
A Yes, I said they did happen, yes.
BY DR. SAUTER: I have no further questions, your Honor.
Thank you.
BY DR. LATERNSER:
Q Your Honor I just have a very few questions. Witness, at the beginning of the war between Germany and Greece, were you a soldier at that time?
A I was a war correspondent at the Front.
Q And were you in May, June and July 1941, in Athens?
A What year?
Q 1941.
A Yes, I was.
Q Who executed the occupation of Athens, the Germans or the Italians?
A During the entire first period of May it was the Germans; later on came the Italians, with the only difference that the Germans had seen to it that they were able to keep whatever was tangible and essential.
Court No. V, Case No. VII.
Q. I didn't ask you about that, witness. I just wanted to know approximately when the Italians took over the supreme military command administration in Athens.
A. It was the end of May or early in June, if I am not mistaken.
Q. You mean the year 1941?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know whether, in the conditions of capitulation there was a provision according to which the Greeks obligated themselves officially not to fight the German any more?
A. No, I know of no such thing.
Q. You told us yesterday about the development of the Zervas movement and you said that in the first period, July 1942 to November 1942, there were 98 members.
A. I said that most of the gorilla forces, the number on the 23rd of October amounted to 98 men, including Zervas.
Q. And in the next period, from November 1942 to December, you mentioned the number 500 to 600.
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. Now, we are speaking of the 98. Did they all remain with that movement?
A. All those that were left and hadn't gotten killed.
Q. Killed by whom?
A. By the Italians and the Germans in the battles fought against the two.
Q. Witness, how strong is a batallion?
A. The battalions in the gorilla forces did not have the personnel strength that normal military organizations have. In any case, the personnel strength was anything from between 120 men to 250 and that was at the time when the total number of gorillas was approximately 10,000 men.
Q. Now, I would like to know, because you have already testified about military matters, how strong a normal battalion is?
A. According to the structure of the French army, which applied to our army also, a battalion had a personnel strength of 800 to 1000 men. However, today, as our army is based on British principles, the personnel strength in a Greek battalion in a Greek army today ranges between 50 and 300: therefore, practically the same as that of the gorilla forces in the mountains.
Q. Now, you said yesterday that the battles were fought against four Italian battalions.
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. How strong approximately was one of these Italian battalions?
A. According to the information which we had at the time of the battle of Skoulikaria, they must have had from between 350 to 500 men in one battalion plus their transportation, whatever it was -- vehicles, mules or horses.
Q. Did I understand you correctly, that you said that the Italian battalions had about 350 to 500 men?
A. Yes, that is correct -- 350 to 500 men.
Q. Then these 98 men would have opposed 1500 to 1800 Italians?
A. Absolutely.
Q. And how did these battles turn out?
A. I believe that Mr. Defense Counsel doesn't know very well what gorilla warfare means. I would like to tell you that within 17 days, which was between the 23rd of October and the 10th of November and during the battle of Gorgopotamus, after the battle of Gorgopotamus, after exactly one month after this battle, we carried out, for one month after that battle, we carried out continuous harassing of the enemy, attacking them from mountain to mountain, from ridge to ridge, and from valley to valley.
We killed a lot of them. We captured lots of them and we even captured their means of transportation.
Q. But, witness, did I understand you correctly to say that you with your 98 men even attacked these Italians?
A. Absolutely. Why is it so funny to you, Mr. Defense Counsel? After all, Greece did win the war over Italy, although Greece only had 7 million in it's population number and the Italians had 14 millions.
Q. I summarized that these 98 men attacked 1500 to 1800 Italians and even chased them away.
A. These 98 men for a period of two months and a half bothered the Italians to such an extent that they forced them to leave. Yes, even more than that, the Italians colonel in charge of those Italians gave the order, made the proposal to General Zervas to give him permission to leave, promising him he would never return and he issued such orders, but his proposals were not accepted.
Q. Witness, were those hard fights?
A. Absolutely, yes.
Q. How many losses did you have?
A. One lieutenant colonel was killed. His name was Avgerinos, and we also had fourteen dead during the first phase of the struggle. Later on our losses became more severe, forcefully, because we used more men.
Q. But you had only 98 men at that time?
A. Mr. Defense Counsel is not following very much the proceedings here. In any case, the prosecution asked me about those things and I said that on the 23rd of October, during the first phase of the struggle, we had 98 men whereupon the Bridge of Gorgopotamus was blown up; and in December and after that many more things happened.
The British started throwing supplies down by parachutes, and uniforms and arms.
Q. Witness, I believe you have answered my question. We can leave this point.
A. And the battle continued.
Q. Witness, have you ever participated yourself in battle?
A. Personally, I watched the battle between the two parties by being in between the two. It was not my task to fight. It was my task to watch and I was right in the front line together with the other gorillas who were fighting. This does not necessarily mean that I did not make use of the weapon I had.
Q. Witness, would you please be more brief in answering my questions? Did you personally have a weapon?
A. Absolutely.
Q. But you just said that you were an observer and didn't shoot.
A. I said that the one does not stop the other. In the first place I was a gorilla and in the secondary station came my job as a war correspondent but the first did not stop the second.
Q. I asked you, did you personally participate in any battle?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. When and where?
A. (N.I.)
Q. If you answer my questions very briefly, I will be very happy. I just want to know when and where you fought.
A. I participated, for instance, in the battle in the Prebissiva on the 5th and 6th of July 1944. I also participated in the attack against the German column near the Bridge of Zita. I also participated in the battle of Menina.
Q. Did you shoot personally in those battles?
A. Yes and yes and yes.
Q. You said yesterday something about the conduct of the Zervas troops when they were surrounded. Were you ever surrounded?
A. No, not personally, no.
Q. How do you know, then, how the Zervas troops conducted themselves when they were surrounded?
A. The same way I knew about it in the same manner in which the defense counsel knows about quite a few facts in which possibly he was not involved. For instance, we know that the French were encircled in the Sedan.
Q. What is the difference, witness, between you and me? That means you don't know how the troops conducted themselves as you were not there personally. Witness please answer my question briefly. Do you know?
A. Personally, of course, I don't know anything because I wasn't there.
Q. Why didn't you say that yesterday?
A. I wasn't asked anything in that connection.
Q. You mean that you can tell the Tribunal anything you have ever heard you can tell the Tribunal as a fact?
A. I did not Commit anything in particular to the Tribunal. I was asked what I knew. I want asked what I had seen. Whenever I was asked if I had seen it, I said I had seen it or hadn't seen it; and if they asked me how I know about it I explained how I did.
Q. But were you used differently that way from other witnesses, I would have to ask you every time whether you had seen it or whether you had heard about it.
A. That's up to you.
Q. Well, can I assume that everything you have said here you either heard or saw or were told by somebody and perhaps saw something of it yourself?
A. The moment I receive an official report from a unit, according to which they are encircled and the report contains exactly where and how they were encircled that, of course, is according to the logic which prevails all over the world, with the exception of here, I believe it would mean that it is an official report ans I can state it.
Q. Therefore, you are or a journalist than a witness? Give me a brief answer.
Q. In Greece the term "correspondent," "journalist" is an honorary term. It is not as it used to be in Goebbels's time that this was propagandistic, and a man who would tell lies. In any case, in Greece whoever is a correspondent or a newspaper man would always toil the truth and they consider that an honor.
Q. But I didn't mean this in a derogatory sense. I just mean that whatever you have described here you didn't see personally, did you?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Your Honors, the witness has testified her on many occasions that he has gone back and forth to the mountains and he has seen battle and on March 1944, until the end, he has actually been in the mountains with Zervas' troops. I think if Dr. Laternser wants to quote the witness's testimony, he ought to quote it correctly.
THE PRESIDENT: I have this thought in connection with this examination, that possibly Dr. Laternser is endeavoring to attack the credibility of the witness and his questions are directed along that lino. However, although I do not want to limit the cross examination, I suggest that we spent considerable time along this line, Dr. Aternswe, and perhaps you made your point along that phase of the questioning and we might proceed to something lose.
DR. LATERNSER: Yes your Honor, but I just have a few questions.
Q. Witness, were you one of those 98 people who fought against the the Italians?
A. No.
DR. LATERNSER: I have no further questions.
DR. WEISGERBER (Counsel for the defendant Speidel)
Q. Witness, you are well informed about all the undertakings of the Servas organization?
A Yes.
Q. You said yesterday that the Zervas organization in the first month of the year 1944 had about 3,000 to 4,000 men.
A. That is in the Epiros area.
Q. Were there any further EDES units an Euboea?
A. Now unit which had any connection with Zervas' forces ever existed on Euboea.
Q. Witness, can you briefly tell us what the Evzones were in that organization?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I object to the question. It is not within the scope of the direct examination.
DR WEISGERBER: I would like to make the following statement in this connection, Your Honor. I will quote part of a document in which Evzones are mentioned in this connection, and therefore I consider this question not only as admissible, but as necessary.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I do not believe the witness testified on direct of any knowledge of any Evzones Organization, Your Honor.
PRESIDENT WENNERSTRUM: Sustained.
BY DR. WEISGERBER:
Q. Witness, did members of the EDES organization, together with Communists, pardon me, together with EVzones, ever fight communists?
A. No, at no time, and whoever was a member of the Evzones organization and said that he fought, - who in any case said he was a member of the EDES organization, and said he fought together with the Evzones is a traitor.
Q. Then I want the witness to see the document NOKW 717, Prosecution's Exhibit 435, in the Document Book 18, page 27 of the German Text, and if I have noted this correctly, page 24 of the English text, there it says its NOKW 717-- and this is a daily report of the military Commander Southeast, to Army Group F, of the 4th of March 1944. There it reads:
"16 kilometers southeast from Chalkis, Evzones Regiment No. 1, together with EDES civilian guards repulsed band attacks."
Is this report correct?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I object to the question. I do not believe the witness is competent to testify about that.
PRESIDENT: Sustained.
MR. SIMHA: Your Honor, I believe the witness wants to answer that question.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: If your Honors please, I do not believe the witness is competent, and therefore should not be permitted to answer.
DR. WEISBERGER: I cannot permit-
PRESIDENT WENNERSTRUM: The Court will reverse its ruling, and permit him to answer.
A. I do not want to have any such dirty statements made against the greatest fighting organization in Greece. Those statements are statements of propaganda and nothing else.
DR. WEISGERBER: This is a matter of a document which the prosecution has submitted in order to prove its claim. If I understand the witness correctly, he wishes to say that this document is wrong at the place.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I object to Dr. Weisgerber's remarks. This document, especially the part which he quotes, "was submitted to sustain the prosecution's claim," and therefore I ask it be stricken from the record.
PRESIDENT WENNERSTRUM: Objection overruled.
BY DR. WEISGERBER:
Q. Witness, is the name General Liakos known to you?
A. I have heard the name.
Q. Was he a follower to EDES?
A. No, he was not, and it was in the interests of the Germans to put several dirty subjects into the EDES; at least to say that they were in the EDES; that is what I mean.
Q. Did General Liakos ever lead or command an EDES unit?
A. No, at no time did he do such a thing.
Q. I want to submit to the witness, the Prosecution Document NOKW 692, Prosecution's Exhibit 422, it is contained in Document Book 8, page 114 and page 115 of the English text, there it says:
"EDES Company Euboea, 100 FDES members under command of General Liakos together with German armed units were committed from Chalkis; only small successes against communists so far."
Will you still maintain that no EDES members fought together with Germans or with the agreement of the Germans against communists?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Your Honor, the witness may be confused. I ask that he be instructed that this document submitted by the prosecution is a captured German document.
DR. WEISGERBER: Your Honor, I ask you to permit me the following statement. This is a document which doubtless comes from German origin, but the prosecution has submitted this document, as well as a hundred others, in order to support their own claims; whatever it wants to prove, among other things, it wants to support by means of these very documents. There I see no reason.
PRESIDENT WENNERSTRUM: I think the objection which the prosecution has made, and which is not really in the nature of an objection hut a request for an admonition to the witness, needs no comment on the part of the examiner. I might say to the witness that this, the document to which he refers, is a captured German War document, and in connection with the question, the witness will keep that fact in mind in answering the question.
You may answer the question.
A. Now whoever said that he was a member of the Evzones and that he fought together with the Germans, is a traitor. All those people were traitors, those who were fighting with units which possibly had German weapons, and General *ervas, by sending reports and telegrams to the Middle East headquarters, was reporting those incidents and he disclosed the German tricks.
PRESIDENT WENNERSTRUM: The Tribunal will adjourn at this time until Monday morning at nine-thirty.
...Tribunal adjourned at 1630 hours until 0930 hours Monday August 16, 1947.....
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 18 August 1947, 0930-1630, Justice 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 Court.
May it please Your Honors, all defendants are present in the Courtroom.
The Courtroom will be seated.
PRESIDING JUSTICE BURKE: You may proceed.
CROSS EXAMINATION (continued) WITNESS COSTAS TRIANDAPHYLIDIS
BY DR. MUELER TORGOW:
Q Witness, for what reason before the coalitions which you talked about of all resistance on 23 July 1943, was, if that there were different movements founded in Greece, especially the EAM and the EDES?
MR. FENSTIRMACHER: I object to the question. I do not think it is within the scope of the direct examination.
PRESIDING JUSTICE BURKE: If the witness knows he may answer.
A Yes, I do have an answer to your question, Mr. Defense Counsel. The reason was that various persons formed various groups. These various people amongst each other might have had different political idea. However, one point has to be stressed. That is all of the Greeks who took to the mountains, and all of the Greeks who joined the resistance movements only had one thought, to fight the invader.
Q Witness, why did these various movements hold various political views? You know something about it, I am sure.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: We are getting pretty far afield from the 2l52 direct examination.
As I understand the direct examination, the witness only testified to the EDES organization, its military structure, the uniforms they wore, and the manner of warfare.
PRESIDING JUSTICE BURKE: The objection will be sustained.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: The subject is the activity of the German Occupation Forces in Greece in 1941 to 1943. Apart from this, the witness on Friday and Saturday made general explanations not only pertaining to the question of military organization of the EDES, but also of the ABM generally, and the relation of AEM to EDES. Within the frame work I put this, my question.
PRESIDING JUSTICE BURKE: Your question seems to indicate that you call for his conclusion as to what they thought, and as to his ideas. I think that it is incompetent.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: You want to know facts, your Honor.
PRESIDING JUSTICE BURKE: Then I suggest that you ask them.
BY DR. MUELLER-TORGOW:
Q Witness, what political parties had the attention of the EDES party and those of the AEM?
A The EDES organization of the groups had contact relationships with those political groups that wanted to fight the invader, with all of them without exception. I was not a member of the AEM and therefore I could not testify as to that, and I was not interested in it.
Q Witness, if you didn't know that, then I put it to you, that in a Greek newspaper, 5 April, 1947, that the constituents of these two groups was the following. I should like this to refresh your memory to this effect:
"The EDES have liberal, monarchistic and socialistic ideas* the AEM is the left, -- has the leftist tendencies," and this was written by a Greek journalist.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Your Honor, I object to the question. I do not think it is proper cross-examination.
PRESIDING JUSTICE BURKE: The objection is sustained.
Q Witness, you said on the 23rd of August, 1943, the old organization in Greece had come to agreement and had been unified. Was that in writing or orally, and who were the members, -- who were the participants of the EDES and the AEM?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Your Honor, I object to the question. The defendant has testified that he was not a member of the AEM or ALES and he can therefore not know who any representative of AIM or ELAs were.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: Your Honor, the witness expressly told us about this agreement, and its uniformity. My question is in connection with that he has stated here. If he does not know it, he should say he doesn't know it. The question must be admissable, however.
PRESIDING JUSTICE BURKE: If the witness has personal knowledge of the question he may answer.
A Yes, I do know something about it, and I shall give you a detailed answer. The National units of the theatre were recognized, they were recognized groups from the headquarters of the Middle East. They were regular units of the army commanded by the Middle East, and therefore the agreement which took place on the 23rd of July, 1943, was under the auspices of representatives of headquarters of the Middle East. This agreement was made in writing.
The main terms contained in this agreement provided that the national units of General Zervas, the units of the ELAS, and the units of Colonel Psaros would receive military orders from the Middle East, and act according to those orders while performing military operations. It was drawn up by the Unites headquarters and all of those units.
This common headquarters which had been set up was competent for these organizations, and also it consisted of the mission of the British. If you are interested in names of the people who were in that common headquarters, I can give you names, and in any case I could tell you they were all Creek officers of the regular army.
For instance for the unit of the ELAS, Colonel Petjopoulakas and -
Q That is sufficient witness. Who was Psaros?
A Colonel Psaros was a regular colonel of the Creek Army, as the man in charge of the Guerilla forces of the organization EKKA.
Q What kind of any organization was this EKKA?
A It was an organization of national resistance.
Q Exactly like the others in Greece?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q Witness, this unification of the 23rd of April, 1943; how long did that remain in 1943?
A Until the month of October, 1943.
Q Why only until October, 1943? What happened then?
A This is an internal Greek matter and that has nothing to do with the crimes committed by the Germans before that incident, during and after that incident.
Q I didn't ask you that, witness. I asked you why the unification of the 23rd of August 1943, was only observed until October 1943.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: If your Honors please, I object to the question. I think it is without the scope of the direct examination.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: Your Honor, this is in connection with the statement of the witness on Friday.
PRESIDING JUSTICE BURKE: The witness is assumed to be able to answer the question. I suggest that he answer it.
A In order to stop the idea on the part of the German Defense Counsel, according to which you are trying to say that Greece during those years were fighting Communists, I would like to correct that, and say that the reason why this thing stopped in October 1943, was that the Germans were throwing one against another, and it is with this policy that they succeeded in throwing one group against the other. If you want some more, I could even give you dates and details of all of those things.
Q I would like to ask you witness, the Germans according to the old Roman principle did divide the resistance groups "divide et impera" in October, 1943. Is that correct?
A What I wanted to say is this, that the Germans were not fighting the communist organization because they were communists; they were fighting every Greek, they were fighting every patriot, also the national organizations.
In any case, whatever they found in those organizations, certain people in those communist organizations, certain people who would help them, they would not step; they would not hesitate in employing their aid and use it against the other organizations and groups. Just to give you an example, I can state this; that they did not stop on that occasion to take communists and employ their aid, and have the communists show them where ELAS organization was, namely in Zagoria, and that was on the 15th of October, 1943. They encircled the unit of Zagoria, in Arachovitsa and they destroyed it. The delegation that went to Zervas on the 5th of October, also had the task, the order, to go to the 8th ELAS division also, and they told these people there that in case they should be ready to sign an agreement with the Germans, they would use them also in order to fight the others, and would help them, rather, in order to even go back behind or before that period of time, and there are certain photographs to prove that, that is, official photographs, in Athens, and ---
Q Were you in Zagoria and Arachovirsa when this happened? Were you present when this happened?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I wonder if we can have the witness' answer before the defense counsel interrupts.
A We have documents-
PRESIDING JUSTICE BURKE: May I suggest for the convenience of the interpreter, and for the intelligent reception on the part of the Tribunal, that the answer to broken down in segments rather than given as a long discourse. It makes it very difficult for the interpreters and sometimes somewhat difficult for the Tribunal to keep the continuity of the answer, to may I suggest that in the future, a brief statement be given and interpreted, so far as competent, and in that fashion we will be able to understand a little better the context of the testimony.
MR. DENNEY: I cannot hear anything on the second channel over her, your Honor. I never can hear the question in English, and I cannot hear anything your Honor is saying.