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.
PRESIDING JUSTICE BURKE: It may be well to have the system checked.
(A short recess was taken at 2156 hours.)
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: You may proceed.
BY DR. MUELLER-Torgaw:
A.- We have documents in Greece to prove that the Germans were releasing Communist leaders from their prisons in order to employ them against us. For instance, there was a man by the name of Tzimas, one of the Communist leaders. And I also know of another case where 35 Communist leaders were released from the Concentration Camp of Chaidari. The Germans would kill every Greek citizen, without differentiating between them, the moment they fought against them. Regardless if they were Royalists, Communists, or Democrats. The Germans would tend and would be ready to use every Greek citizen who did not have enough brains to know-better. They would use every criminal means and every criminal element, regardless whether he acted like a Communist, like a Royalist, or like a Democrat.
Q.- Was this the rule, Witness, that the Germans collaborated with the Communists, that is the EAM? And was it....
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Will you speak a little louder, Interpreter, please?
INTERPRETER (Dr. Hildesheimer): Was it usual, witness, that the Germans collaborated with the Communists, that is the EAH?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: If Your Honor please, I submit that we're getting very very far afield.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: That objection is sustained.
BY DR. MUELLER-TORGOW:
Q.- Witness, you haven't answered my question whether the Germans in October 1943 divided the two organization EDES and EAM. Will you please explain this very shortly.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: If Your Honors please, I object to the question for the same reason that I objected to the previous question.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: If the witness knows he may answer it.
BY DR. MUELLER-TORGOW:
A.- I answered. I said that the German policy was to start the EAM to fight against the EDES; and they succeeded in doing so. Therefore, the patriots who were in the EDES and in the ELAS are not guilty because they were ready to fight against the Germans. What I meant to say was that for the attack of the EAM against the EDES the patriots are not responsible. It's not their fault. These people wanted to fight against the Germans. I would, like to stress the following point; that tho attack of the EAM against the ZERVAS group coincided with the attack of the German Edelweiss Division against Dzoumerka.
Q.- That'll do, witness.
A.- I would like to continue, Your Honor. The proof for all of this is contained in the telegrams between the British Mission in Greece and tho Middle East Headquarters, and also by the testimony and report given by Brigadier General Eddy, and by the radio broadcast by Field Marshal Wilson.
Q.- Now, witness; do you admit, therefore, that between ELAS and EAM there were differences?
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: For him to admit it is a question of admission. He presumably has stated the fact. Shouldn't that conclude it?
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: I only wanted to clarify it; Your Honor; because the witness on Friday and Saturday said the contrary.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Very well; proceed.
BY DR. MUELLER-TORGOW:
Q.- Witness, you were personal adviser of General Zervas, and you wore a uniform. What military rank did you holt?
A.- I was a simple guerilla.
Q.- What rank? There must have been rank in the military organization of Zervas?
A.- I told the Prosecution during the examination that in tho organiz ation of Zervas I was the man in charge of the press department.
Q.- Witness, you said on Saturday -- you answered a question by the defense counsel that you wore a uniform. You must, therefore, have hold a military rank. Which was it?
A.- I was a soldier.
Q.- That was the lowest rank then?
A.- Yes, quite so; absolutely.
Q.- Witness, in what matters did you advise General Zervas generally?
A.- I advised General Zervas on whatever matters had any relation with national politics and also with regard to the press part.
Q.- Then you can probably inform me of the following: What was the strength of the EDES in autumn 1943 on the Poloponnes?
A.- We had a personnel strength of between 300 and 400 men.
Q.- Who was the leader?
A.- That I don't remember, but they were subordinated to the British Missions orders.
Q.- Do you know, witness, that the EDES units on the Poloponnes, under Major Bretakos during fall 1943. were diminated by the EAM?
A. What the defense counsel said could not be correct because Rittmeister Bretakos never did belong to the organization of the EDES.
Q. Do you know anything, apart from the personality of Bretakos that the units were eliminated on the Peloponnes?
A. The EDES group had received an order from the British Mission to go into the mainland in order to avoid having clashes on the Peloponnes with the EAR. The order was executed and most of these men succeeded in getting into the Epiros area.
Q. You haven't answered my question, Witness.
A. You asked me if they had been destroyed, and I told you they were not destroyed because they received the order to withdraw.
Q. That doesn't exclude each of these two things, but I shall now come to something else. Witness, on Friday you said that General Zervas had in February 1945 returned from the Mountains to Athens. Why only in February 1945? When the only enemy, that is the Germans, had already left Greece in October.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I object to the question. The Witness testified that in February 1945 he, the witness, returned from the mountains to Athens, and he said nothing about General Zervas' returning to Athens.
DR. MUELLER - TORGOW: Your Honor, he said he together with General Zervas had returned from the mountains to Athens on that date, as far as I remember
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: The Witness will recall himself when that was his answer. The answer, in all probability, may be brief.
BY DR. MUELLER-TORGOW:
A. In February 1945 I returned to Athens together with General Zervas because the national guerrilla groups had been demobilized according to a general order of the Greek Government. Those Guerrillas who were of age to serve in the Army remained, and they formed the Epiros Division.
That's all I have to say, and whatever else Mr. Defense Counsel is trying to implicate has nothing to do with my being here.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: The question of his implication has no bearing upon the duties of the Tribunal. We will determine that matter. The Witness will answer if he has knowledge of the facts; otherwise without comment. Proceed.
BY DR. MUELLER-TORGOW:
Q. Witness, the EAM units did not prevent the General to return from the mountains to Athens did they?
A. MR. FENSTERMACHER: If Your Honors please, I don't see how this is at all relevant to either the direct examination or to any attempts to impeach the credibility of the Witness.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE : The Objection is sustained.
BY DR. MUELLER-TORGOW:
Q. Witness, is it true that General Zervas is now Minister for Public Security in the present Greek Government of Maximos?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. Witness, why was a Minister for Public Security erected in Greece?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I object to the question, Your Honor. I don't think it is within the scope of direct examination.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: Your Honor , this question is in immediate connection with the scope of the EDES and the EAM.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Very well, We'll take the answer briefly.
BY DR. MUELLER TORGOW:
A. This was not the first time it was established. It has existed since 1936.
Q. Could it not have been dissolved after the Germans had left, or was this situation insecure? If it was insecure, why?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: If Your Honors please, I object to the question.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: The objection is sustained.
BY DR. MUELLER TORGOW:
Q. Witness, the EAM simultaneously with the departure of the Germans---were they eliminated?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: If Your Honors please, I don't see the relevance of questions of this nature.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: We'll take the answer for what it may be worth.
BY DR. MUELLER TORGOW:
A. No, it was not dissolved.
Q. Why not?
A. The EAM had certain political aims which it wanted to attain.
Q. And ELAS?
A. The same thing.
Q. Witness, the ELAS is a military organization. It had certain political aims, as it was said before, and it was extremely left.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I think the conclusion of counsel is perhaps not appropriate at this place. If you have a direct question, or cross-examination question, please frame it accordingly.
BY DR. MUELLER TORGOW:
Q. Witness, why, after the Germans left Greece, was the EAM not dissolved? That was the question which I put and which has not been answered yet.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: If Your Honors please, we are now beginning to get into the matters after the Germans left Greece, and the defense counsel is obviously trying to inject into this trial matters which are now going on in Greece. And I submit that they are not at all relevant, and they have nothing to do with the cross examination and the credibility of the Witness.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: The objection is sustained.
DR. MUELLER TORGOW: In that case I have no further questions.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Is there further cross-examination? You may proceed, Mr. Fenstermacher .
RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:
Q. Witness, you testified on Saturday that you knew that General Lanz's groups furnished food to the Red Cross for the relief of the Greek people. Is that true?
A. Yes, there were such incidents.
Q. When?
A. That was around that period of time when the Germans were about ready to withdraw.
Q. And what date was that ?
A. That was around September 1944.)
Q. When did General Lanz ' troops come to the Epiros section of Greece?
A. Towards the end of June 1943 and General Lanz himself came in August 1943.
Q. Between August 1943 and September or October 1944, do you know of any other cases in which General Lanz' troops furnished food to the Red Cross for the relief of the Greek people?
A. No, I don't; but I can also explain why they did give food in September 1944.
4. Do you know why, Witness?
A. That was the time during which the Germans were about ready to withdraw, and at that time they tried to most anything to oblige the Greeks kindly and to stop them from making more attacks against them.
Q. Witness, I believe you also testified on Saturday that you knew that when General Lanz left Jannina, the capital of Epiros, that the mayor of Jannina. thanked General Lanz . Did you testify to that?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q The man who was mayor of Jannina at that time, where is he now?
A He is in Greece.
Q Is he a free citizen of Greece?
A Yes, he is.
Q. Is he mayor of Jannina today?
A That I don't know. I don't think so. But I could explain it to you why he thanked the Germans.
Q If you know, you may explain.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I think he explained it in some detail on Friday or Saturday.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Very well, your Honor, we may omit it.
BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:
Q Witness, during what period of time from the information which you had at your disposal were most of tho villages in the Epiros section of Greece burned?
AAll the villages of the Epiros were burned during the period of time during which the Germans were in that area.
Q What period of time was that?
A From the 20th of June 1933 until the month of October 1944.
Q Did you over see any villages while they were actually burning, witness?
A Yes, I did, on three occasions.
Q They were villages which had been defended by EDES units?
A No, at no time.
Q Did the EDES troops ever execute retaliation measures?
A No.
Q Witness, did the burning of villages by German troops discontinue at any time as a result of differences which existed between EDES and ELAS units?
A I don't quite understand what you mean.
Q You testified that there were certain differences between EDES and ELAS units. My question is, were those differences at all relevant with respect to the methods of warfare, namely the burning of villages which the German troops employed?
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Wouldn't that be pretty much of a conclusion? He may state the facts. The conclusions will be drawn from the facts. I think it is the responsibility of the Tribunal.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Very well, your Honor, I will withdraw the question.
BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:
Q Witness, when you returned to Athens in April 1941 from covering the Italian-German war, did you see German troops there?
A Yes, I did.
Q Did you also see Italian troops?
A Yes, I did.
Q From your observation, were there more German troops than Italian troops in Athens?
DR. LATERNSER: I object. But in the this case, no facts are requested, but a judgment.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I believe I have asked the witness to state whatever he observed, your Honor.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I am sorry. I received only a part of the objection of the defense counsel to this.
DR. LATERNSER: I would also like the defense counsel in this case to ask for facts. The prosecution counsel should ask for facts even in this case.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I assume the question is predicated on the fact that the answer will be an answer of facts.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: That is right, your Honor, based on whatever the witness observed.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: You may proceed.