One Hundred and Eighty-Ninth Day:
Monday, 29th July, 1946
[Page 5]
But let us limit ourselves on this point. We aim only at recalling that
each of the principal deeds charged against the defendants may be
considered by itself as violating the criminal laws or one or other of
the positive internal laws of every civilized country, or as violating
that common International Law which M. de
[Page 6]
We must, however, go farther; for while it does not omit any culpable
fact as such, the analysis of the defendants' guilt in the light of
internal law is only a first approximation which would enable us to
prosecute the defendants merely as accomplices and not as principal
authors. And we are anxious to prove that they were in reality the
principal culprits.
We hope to succeed in this by developing the following three points:
1. The defendants' acts are elements in a criminal political plan.
2. The co-ordination of the various departments headed by these men
implies close co-operation between them for the realization of their
criminal policy.
3. They must be judged as functioning within the scope of this criminal
policy.
The acts of the defendants are the elements of a criminal political
plan.
The defendants have been active in widely differing spheres. As
politicians, diplomats, soldiers, sailors, economists, financiers,
jurists, or propagandists, they represent practically every form of
liberal activity. We recognize unhesitatingly, however, the tie that
binds them together. They have all put the best -- or the worst -- of
themselves at the service of the Hitlerite State. To a certain extent
they represent the brains of that State; but they themselves were not
the whole brain. Nevertheless, no one can doubt that they were an
important part of it. They conceived the policy of that State. They
wanted to transform their thoughts into action and all contributed in
almost the same degree toward its realization. This is true, no matter
whether it applies to Hess or Goering, professional politicians who
admit never having practised any other profession but that of agitator
or statesman; or to Ribbentrop, Neurath, Papen, the diplomats of the
regime; or to Keitel, Jodl, Doenitz or Raeder, the fighting men; to
Rosenberg, Streicher, Frank or Frick, the inventors -- if that term can
be applied to them -- of the ideology of the system; to Schacht and
Funk, the financiers without whom the system would have gone bankrupt
and collapsed in the resulting inflation before it could rearm; to
jurists like Frank , to publicists and propagandists like Fritzsche and
- again - Streicher, devoted to the dissemination of the common idea;
or to technicians like Speer or Sauckel, without whom the idea could
never have been translated into action as it has been; to policemen such
as Kaltenbrunner who destroyed morale by terror; to ordinary Gauleiter
like Seyss-Inquart, Schirach, or - again - Sauckel; to administrators
and high-ranking officials as well as politicians, who gave definite
shape to the common policy conceived by the whole State and Party
machine.
I know very well that the shadow of those who are absent looms over this
machine, and today's defendants are perpetually reminding us of them:
"Hitler wanted this, Himmler wanted this, Bormann wanted this." They
say: "I only obeyed," and their defence counsels outbid them. Hitler, the
monstrous tyrant, the fanatic visionary, imposing his will with an
irresistible magnetic power. This is too simple. This is too sweeping.
No man is entirely unreceptive to suggestion, insinuation, and
influence; and Hitler escaped that law no more than any other man. We
have had irrefutable proof of this in all the glimpses afforded us by
these proceedings of the struggle for influence which went on in the "great man's " entourage. Malicious underhand calumnies were circulated,
there were intrigues which reminded us at times, during the proceedings,
of the little courts of the Italian Renaissance. All the elements were
present, even to murder. Did not Goering, before he himself fell into
disgrace, rid himself of Roehm. and Ernst, who had plotted, not against
their master, but against him, as Gisevius told us. So much imagination,
such perseverance in evil, but also such efficiency, show us that Hitler
was not blind to the actions and intrigues of the men
[Page 7]
At a time when Germany was still disarmed and when discretion was still
necessary, Schacht, who was at Hitler's side, asked for colonies. We
remember Hirscheid's testimony. He dissembled, however, and in part
disguised the master conception of the State machine to which he
belonged, and we could not denounce this idea so easily were it not for
the disconcerting naivete of the "great man" who had laid his entire
plan of campaign open to the inspection of the whole world ten years
before.
Indeed we read in Mein Kampf:
(Excerpt from Page 641.)
[Page 8]
And this justification must be established also before our German
posterity on the grounds that for each one who has shed his blood the
life of a thousand others will be guaranteed to posterity. The territory
on which one day our German peasants will be able to bring forth and
nourish their sturdy sons will justify the blood of the sons of the
peasants that has to be shed today. And the statesmen who will have
decreed this sacrifice may be persecuted by their contemporaries, but
posterity will absolve them from all guilt for having demanded this
offering from their people."
Living-space, in proportion to the magnitude of the State, is the basis
of all power. One may refuse for a time to face the problem, but finally
it is solved one way or the other. The choice is between advancement or
decline. In fifteen or twenty years' time we shall be compelled to find
a solution. No German statesman can evade the question longer than that.
We are at present in a state of patriotic fervour, which is shared by
two other nations: Italy and Japan. [Page 9]
After six years, the situation is today as follow:
The national-political unity of the Germans has been achieved, apart
from minor exceptions. Further successes cannot be attained without the
shedding of blood.
Danzig is not the subject of the dispute at all. It is a question of
expanding our living-space in the East and of securing our food
supplies....
The population of non-German areas will perform no military service, and
will be available as a source of labour.
The Polish problem is inseparable from conflict with the West."
And then came the war; and in a few months' time all Germany was led to
believe that her strength was irresistible and that she was on the way
to the conquest oftheworld. All that was implied by Hitler's cruel and
monstrous words:
Speech by Hitler on the Eastern territories, 16.7.41:
[
Previous |
Index |
Next ]
Home ·
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
Search
Nizkor
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and
to combat hatred.
Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.
As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may
include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and
provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist
and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.
(Part 2 of 12)
[M. CHAMPETIER DE RIBES continues.] "I have never founded extermination camps for Jews. I was never in
favour of the existence of these camps, but if Adolf Hitler placed this
terrible responsibility on the shoulders of his people, I, too, share in
it; for we conducted a campaign against the Jews for years, we made all
kinds of statements against them ......"
In his last few words, Frank condemns, along with himself, all those who
pursued the campaign of incitement against the Jews in Germany and
elsewhere. Let us remember Frank's answer to the question put to him by
his defence counsel as to the charges brought against him in the
Indictment. It is true of all the defendants and still more of those who
were closer to Hitler than he himself:
"As to these charges, I have only this to say: I ask the Tribunal to
determine the extent of my guilt at the end of these proceedings; but I
should like to say on my own account that after all I have seen in the
course of these five months of the trial, which have given me a general
view of all the atrocities that have been committed, I myself feel
thoroughly guilty."
Von Schirach for his part stated:
"This is the crime for which I am answerable before God and the German
people. I trained the youth of our country for the man who, for years
and years, I considered the head of our country. I trained our youth to
have the same regard for him that 1 had myself. My crime lies in the
fact that I trained our youth for a man who was a murderer, who killed
millions of people . . . Any German who, after Auschwitz, still adheres
to the racial policy, is guilty ... I feel it my duty to say this."
Such cries of conscience were rare in the course of this trial and more
frequently, copying Goering's quibbling vanity, the defendants tried to
extricate themselves by invoking a policy of neo-Machiavellism which
would free the leaders of the State of all personal responsibility. Let
us simply state that no such provisions exist in the laws of any
civilized country, and that, on the contrary, arbitrary and aggressive
acts aimed at personal liberty, at civic rights or at the Constitution,
are all the more severely punished in cases where they have been
committed by a public functionary or high-ranking Government official;
and that the most severe penalties are reserved for the Ministers
themselves (Articles 114 and 115 of the French Penal Code).
"I believe that at first his tendencies were not wholly evil; he
undoubtedly believed that his intentions were only good, but little by
little he became the victim of the charm he exerted over the masses; for
he who begins by seducing the masses is in the end himself seduced by
them, so that this relation between chief and disciple helped to lead
him into the erroneous ways of mob instincts, which every political
chief should strive to avoid."
What was then the great idea behind it all ?
It was indisputably that of the conquest of living-space by any and
every means, even the most criminal.
"Thus the German nation could assure its own future only by being a
world Power. For nearly two thousand years the defence of our national
interests was a matter of world history, as can be seen from our more or
less successful activities in the field of foreign politics. We
ourselves have been witnesses to this, seeing that the gigantic
struggle that went on from 1914 to 1918 was only the struggle of the
German people for their existence on this earth, and it was carried out
in such a way that it has become known in history as the World War. When
Germany entered this struggle it was presumed that she was a world
Power. I say presumed, because in reality she was no such thing. In
1914, if there had been a different proportion between the German
population and its territorial area, Germany would have been really a
world Power, and, if we leave other factors out of account, the war
would have ended in our favour."
(Excerpt from Page 647.)
"In regard to this point I should like to make the following statement:
To demand that the 1914 frontiers should be restored is a glaring
political absurdity that is fraught with such consequences as to make
the claim itself appear criminal. The confines of the Reich as they
existed in 1914 were thoroughly illogical, because they were not really
complete, in view of the geographical exigencies of military defence.
They were not the consequences of a political plan which had been well
considered and carried out. They were temporary frontiers established in
virtue of a political struggle that had not been brought to a finish;
and indeed they were partly the chance result of circumstances."
(Excerpt from Page 649.)
"For the future of the German nation the 1914 frontiers are of no
significance. They did not serve to protect us in the past, nor do they
offer any guarantee for our defence in the future. With these frontiers
the German people cannot maintain themselves as a compact unit, nor can
they be assured of their maintenance. From the military viewpoint these
frontiers are not advantageous or even such as not to cause anxiety. And
while we are bound to such frontiers it will not be possible for us to
improve our present positions
in relation to the other world Powers, or rather in relation to the real
world Powers."
(Excerpt from Page 650.)
"Against this we National Socialists must stick firmly to the aim that
we have set for our foreign policy; namely, that the German people
must be assured the territorial area which is necessary for it to exist
on this earth. And only for such action as is unddrtaken to secure those
ends can it be lawful in the eyes of God and our German posterity to
allow the blood of our people to be shed once again before God, because
we are sent into this world with the commission to struggle for our
daily bread, as creatures to whom nothing is donated and who must be
able to win and hold their position as lords of the earth only through
their own intelligence and courage.
(Excerpt from Page 687.)
"A State which, in an epoch of racial adulteration, devotes itself to
the duty of preserving the best elements of its racial stock must one
day become ruler of the earth."
(Excerpt from Page 135.)
"A stronger race will oust that which has grown weak, for the vital
urge, in its ultimate form, will burst asunder all the absurd chains of
this so-called humane consideration for the individual and will replace
it with the humanity of nature, which wipes out what is weak in order to
give place to the strong."
And then the machinery of State and Party gathered force. The Army,
secretly reorganized, was soon strong enough to allow Germany to rearm
openly. Who, at that time, would have dared to interfere with the
monstrous growth of this biological materialism? Hitler expounded his
theories to a small circle, and those who heard his words are by no
means all Nazis. Informed of their master's aims, they were still
willing to stay by his side, and that condemns them. Is this not the
case with Raeder?
"It is not a question of conquering populations but of conquering
territories suitable for cultivation..."
Hitler, in conference with von Blomberg, von Fristch and Raeder, 5th
November, said:
"Expansion cannot be achieved without smashing human lives and without
taking risks...."
After the disgrace of von Fritsch and von Blomberg, Keitel and Jodl,
chosen for their servile attitude to the regime, had a solid weapon in
their hands. The rearmament went on. On the eve of the conflict Hitler
reiterated his ideas:
"Circumstances must rather be adapted to aims. This is impossible
without invasion of foreign States, or attacks on foreign property.
The period which lies behind us has indeed been put to good use. All
measures have been taken in the correct sequence and in harmony with our
aims.
Extract from minutes of a conference held at the Reich Chancellery on
23rd May, 1939, in the presence of Hitler, Goering, Raeder, Keitel and
others. (Document L-79, Exhibit USA 27.)
"We must keep firmly to the aim of our former policy: To. secure for the
German people the territory to which it is entitled. And this act is the
sole act which, before God and our German posterity, justifies bloodshed ...."
All the cruel and monstrous implications of these words were elaborated
here.
"We shall emphasize again that we were forced to occupy, administer and
secure a certain area.... Nobody shall be able to recognize that it
initiates a final settlement. This need not prevent us taking all
necessary measures -- shooting, deportation... etc."
Further:
"Partisan warfare will have one advantage for us; it enables us to
eradicate all those who oppose us ......"