NAZIS’ WAR GUILT

Press, Volume LXXXI, Issue 24741, 5 December 1945, Page 7

NAZIS’ WAR GUILT

Crimes Against The Peace

BRITISH CASE OPENED {N.Z. Press Association—Copyright) (Rec. 12.50 a.m.) NUREMBERG, Dec. 4. . Great Britain’s case for the prosecution at the war crimes trial in Nuremberg was opened to-day by Sir Hartley Sbawcross, K.C., the British Attorney-General and chief British prosecutor.

The 20 Nazis accused are charged by Britain with crimes against the peace, count No. 2 of the indictment. Among the many documents to be produced by the prosecution are certified copies, of treaties which the accused are stated to have broken.

Sir Hartley Shawcross, in .his opening address, based his arguments on the assertion that wars of aggression were criminal acts at the time the Nazis launched the war. Aggressive wars, he said, had become illegal in the eyes of the nations,

"The British Empire has been twice victorious in wars which were forced on us within the space of one generation,’' said Sir Hartley Shawcross, "but it is precisely because we realise that victory is not enough, and the rule of international law unachievable by a strong arm alone, that the' British nation is taking part in" this trial. There are those who would, perhaps, say that these wretched men should be

dealt with summarily without trial by executive action, that their personal power for evil Is broken, and that, they should be swept aside into oblivion without this elaborate, careful investigation into the part they have played in plunging the world into war. “But that is not the British Empire’s view. Not so would the rule of law be raised and strengthened on the, international, as well as the municipal plane. Not so would future generations realise that Right is not always on the side of big battalions.” Sir Hartley Shawcross said that, ineffective though sanctions, had proved themselves, the world sought to make aggressive war an international crime, and although previous tradition sought to punish States rather than individuals, it was both logical and right that, if ,the act of waging wtilt so If was an offence .against international law, those individuals who shared personal responsibility for bringing it about should answer personally for the course into which they had led their States. Individual war crimes had long been regarded by international law as .triable by the Courts of those-nations whose nationals had been outraged, at least as long as a state of war persisted. He added:' “It would 1 indeed be illogical in the extreme if those who, although they may not by their own hands have committed individual crimes, were responsible for systematic breaches of the laws of war affecting the nationals of so many States, should escape.” ■ , ■ Czechoslovakia • Opening thd prosecution’s case on Czechoslovakia yesterday, the deputyUnited States prosecutor, Mr Sidney Alderman, .described how -.Germany planned the conquest of her neighbour against a, background of friendly diplomatic relations. ■ Goering nodded his agreement when Mr Alderman quoted him as saying: “I give my -word of honour that Germany has no aggressive intentions towards Czechoslovakia.” The conquest had reached the stage of practical planning, however, by the middle of April, ID3B. *-■ • Continuing the presentation of 70 documents dealing with the conquest of Czechoslovakia, Mr Alderman read a secret directive dated May 30, 1933, in which Hitler disclosed his able decision to smash Czechoslovakia in the near future. Keitel transmitted the order to the commanders of the army, navy, and air force with the footnote: “Execution must be assured by October 1, 1938, at the latest.” Mr Alderman then presented Germany’s .“Red Plan” for the Western campaign, which was prefaced, by a General Staff report dated August 25, 1938, stating: "The basic assumption is that France will declare war during the ‘Green Plan,’ Britain will follow, and Russia will probably immediately side with the Western Powers." Target Maps of Britain The General Staff report showed that the Germans completed, before September, 1938, target maps of the London and HuH docks, Britain’s food and oil supply systems, and airfields. The report listed French targets as No, 1 priority, after which the Luftwaffe would attack Britain’s food notably London, hut only if strong forces were available, because of the strength of London’s defences. Mr Alderman pointed out that Hungary, from ■'he first, was considered a possible participant in the Green Plan. The records of a secret conference between Ribbentrop and Hungarian envoys on August 23, 1938, reported him as saying; “Britain and France will remain tranquil because Britain will not needlessly risk her Empire.” Mr Alderman read a document which, he said, demonstrated beyond the slightest doubt the complicity of the General Staff in the shameful fabrication of an incident as an- excuse for war. The document, which was signed by Keitel, declared: “The Green Plan will be set in motion by means of an incident in Czechoslovakia, which will give Germany provocation for military intervention.” The document emphasised the utmpst importance of fixing the exact time for the incident, when weather conditions v/ere favourable for Germany’s superior air forces.

In discussions between ’Hitler and Admiral .Horthy six months before the Munich settlement Hitler remarked that if Hungary wanted to participate in “eating” her neighbours she must participate in the “cooking” by taking part in the invasion of Czechoslovakia.

Cse of Poison Gas One High Command document dealing with projected violations of international law said that the use of poison gas could be ordered after publication of a report that the Czechs had already used it If it were possible to prove the assertion that the Czechs used prohibited gas. jt must be given out to the public, but if the assertion wete unfounded or only partially founded, then the German gas attack would be represented as the need for carrying out a justified reprisal in the same way as the Italians oid in the Abyssinian war. Mr Alderman, after the adjournment. dealt with what he called the inside story of the setting for Munich. “We are now able to spread over

the pages of history the .truth about the fraud and deceit which the Nazi ccnspirators practised in achieving the Munich Pact as a stepping stone for * further aggression,” said the prosecutor. “Hope for *jeace after Munich was a snare careßUy set by the men whose evil character is demonstrated by their own documents.” The documents showed that whereas Mr Chamberlain signed . the Munich agreement under a threat of war from Germany and Italy,.the Axis had already decided to- go to war. Moreover. an order signed by Jodi showed that two Death Head battalions were operating across th*. Czech border before the Munich Pact'was signed. . It was revealed that the leader of the Sudeten Germans, Konrad. Henlein, received 15,000 marks a month from Berlin. The Court then adjourned. schachtTto give EVIDENCE FORMER HEAD OF REICHSBANK NUREMBERG, December 3. Dr. Hjalmar Schacht,' former bead of the Reichsbank, believes that world opinion, as well as the Nuremberg Court, will clear him after he has stated his case to the Court, according to his counsel. Dr. Rudolf Dix, in an -interview with the correspondent .of the Associated Press at Nuremberg. “Schacht is hoping waiting, and praying for the day when he can per- • sonally state ’his case,” said Dr. Dix. “I believe it will be one of the greatest sensations of the trial when he enters the witness-bpx. Schacht believes that when he can state what he did, why, and where he did it, he need not fear.”

The Allied prosecutors to-day denied knowledge of any statement attributed to Goering admitting complicity in the • Reichstag fire of 1933, also the existence. of any affidavits to this .effect. * The Americans, who repeatedly questioned Goering on the subject of the Reichstag fire, reported that Goering stood firm, denying participation'. Mr Justice Jackson, at one stage of the trial, pointed to the accused and said: “These people are so vain that they, documented themselves on a film.” The film to which he referred will be shown in the Nuremberg courtroom'at the week-end. Leni Reifenstahl produced it. according to her own statements, after being badgered by Hitler. The film is called “A Triumph of Will.” Most of the party leaders can be seen in one or more sequences of the film in circumstances clearly illustrating many points that the prosecution i* bringing out. Reifenstahl told interrogators about the circumstances in wh'ch Goebbel shouted to her: “If ycu were not a woman I would have you thrown dowi the stairs.” At Hitler’s request she agreed to film a party congress, but rivalries and jealousies between the party members obstructed the w6rkCaptain Hans Habe, chief •of the American German Language Publications, said that the Germans are more and more accepting the fairness of the Court and are more and. more impressed by the fairness of the presiding Judge. The appearance of representatives of all the Allies combining for a single purpose has also affected German public opinion.