Session 045-06, Eichmann Adolf

Q. When did you receive this letter?

A. We received the letter at the end of 1943.

Q. Who received it?

A. The mother of an acquaintance, a woman who lives here,
alone, today. She received the letter from her daughter;
what was called a “black” letter, not through the official
mail. She had an opportunity to send the letter from there,
and thus we knew already what was going on. When I
objected, one of my acquaintances in the management told me:
“You do not have to go, they cannot do this, six hours
before the departure of the transport they put you in – but
what will happen in another week? You will be in the East,
and you know what that means.”

Q. Did you meet your wife in the end?

A. My wife remained in Theresienstadt until the end of the
War, until I came back.

Presiding Judge: Thank you, Mr. Engelstein, you have
concluded your evidence.

State Attorney Bar-Or: With the permission of the Court, I
shall now deal with the chapter of Yugoslavia. It is
divided into different parts. Not all of Yugoslavia was
treated in the same way, and I shall attempt to deal with
each part separately, in accordance with the chronological

First, document No. 1043, a letter from the Accused, dated
25 April 1940. He still signs under IVD4, and again there
is the additional marking 2(RS), the Reichszentrale (Reich
Centre). He writes to Schumburg at the Foreign Ministry on
the subject of illegal border crossings into Yugoslavia by
German Jews, and he says:

“State police measures have been taken against various
persons who made preparations for illegal crossings by
Jews into Yugoslavia for reasons of material gain, and
who assisted in the crossing. From time to time Jews
are returned over the border by Yugoslav authorities.
Official delivery of Jews by Yugoslav authorities has
not taken place so far. The Jews who are returned in
this way are made to emigrate in the normal way as
quickly as possible.”

This letter was written before the entry of the Germans into

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/867.

State Attorney Bar-Or: We go on to document No. 1042, a
letter from the German legation in Belgrade, addressed to
the Foreign Ministry and dated 26 October 1940. It reports
about the exclusion of Jews in Yugoslavia from the wholesale
trade in foodstuffs. Already then, on 26 October 1940, the
Foreign Ministry transmits to the Accused a copy of that
report which it had received. This is a further document in
Rademacher’s handwriting, which is attached to the report
from the German leagtion.

Presiding Judge: Where is this Banschaft?

A. This is apparently the district administration in
Neusatz. We find this expression also when the Germans
enter Hungary. I think that all these are terms used by the
Austro-Hungarian government before 1918 which are all known
from that period only.

Presiding Judge: This is not a geographic term, only a

State Attorney Bar-Or: That is correct, Your Honour.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/868.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I pass on to document No. 1339. We
are now after the beginning of the occupation, we are
already on 11 May 1941. It is a letter from the military
commander to the head of the operational group of the
Security Police and the Security Service, Standartenfuehrer
Fuchs. Here we shall also now meet the Einsatzkommando. He

“On Wednesday, 14 May 1941, at 16.30 o’clock, a
consultation on Jewish affairs will be held in the
small conference room of the Parliament Building, under
the chairmanship of the Military Commander. The
Military Commander requests you to participate and to
prepare for a discussion of the afore-mentioned

The people of the operational group were, of course, experts
on the Jewish Question, which was not really a military one.

Presiding Judge: Did they operate in Yugoslavia as well?

State Attorney Bar-Or: We shall immediately submit the
organization chart of the Einsatzgruppen – they bear the
same name here. The reference is not really to those
groups. But an organization similar to that in the East is
also found here in Yugoslavia.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/869.

Judge Raveh: I regret that I have to revert once more to
document No. 1042. A new address is mentioned in it, the
“Antisemitische Aktion” – what is this?

State Attorney Bar-Or: The Foreign Ministry transmits the
report from the German legation in Belgrade not only to the
Accused, but also to the Antisemitische Aktion (Antisemitic
Action) in Berlin. It seems to me that this was the organ
of the Party in Berlin which dealt with questions of
European Jewry in general. We must not forget that at that
time there is as yet no German regime in Belgrade; Belgrade
is not yet in a state of war. The Foreign Ministry informs
them about what is being done in this field, and what is
being planned. Here, the Jews are being excluded from
economic life.

Presiding Judge: Does that mean that this is an institution
of the Party?

State Attorney Bar-Or: That is correct. As far as I know,
this was not part of the government, but only of the Party.

I come to document No. 642, a letter from Benzler, the
Minister in Belgrade, to the Party, dated 8 September 1941.
We find that two persons sign here under the heading “Secret
Reich Matter” – Veesenmayer, whom we shall meet again, and
Benzler. The telegram sent says:

“Jews have demonstrably been found to be accomplices in
numerous acts of sabotage and riot. It is therefore
urgent to see to the rounding up and removal of at
least all male Jews. The number in question could be
around 8,000.”

And further on:

“It seems advisable to remove these Jews from the
country as speedily as possible, i.e., in empty freight
barges down the Danube, to be unloaded on Romanian soil
or on an island in the Danube delta.”

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/870.

State Attorney Bar-Or: We pass on to document No. 643.
Here we have a note by Sonnleithner of Foreign Minister
Ribbentrop’s bureau, which refers to this telegram which I
have just submitted and says:

“Concerning the transfer of 8,000 Jews from Serbia to
the territory of Romania, the Foreign Minister has
indicated that such a measure cannot be taken without
the agreement of the Romanians, and that another way
would have to be found to get rid of these Jews.”

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/871.

State Attorney Bar-Or: Still on the same subject, document
No. 644, a telegram from Luther of the Foreign Ministry,
dated 11 September 1941, which says:

“The deportation of Jews to the territory of a foreign
state cannot be approved. A solution of the Jewish
Question will not be achieved in this way. It is left
to your discretion to detain the Jews in work camps and
to employ them on essential public works.”

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/872.

State Attorney Bar-Or: Matters are not arranged so quickly,
at any rate not to the satisfaction of the representatives
of the Reich in Belgrade. Hence document No. 645, a
telegram, dated 10 September 1941, from Veesenmayer and
Benzler to the Foreign Ministry.

Incidentally, it is perhaps worthwhile mentioning that
Benzler was the permanent Ambassador of the Reich, whereas
Veesenmayer appears here as roving ambassador, who is
temporarily attached to the work of the legation in
Belgrade. In the telegram it says that

“Quick and draconic settlement of the Serbian Jewish
Question is a most urgent and practical need. Request
suitable orders from the Foreign Minister, in order to
be able to intervene with extreme emphasis vis-a-vis
Military Commander of Serbia. No resistance is to be
expected from Serbian government and population,
especially since partial measures taken so far have
proved most successful. Identical orders from
Reichsfuehrer-SS to Chief of Special Operations Group
of Security Police and Security Service
Standartenfuehrer Fuchs would expedite matter

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/873.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I pass on to document No. 647. It
was shown to the Accused and marked T/37(193). It is a
letter from Benzler to the Foreign Ministry, dated 12
September 1941, in which he says:

“Housing in work camps impossible under present
circumstances, as security not guaranteed. Camps for Jews
impede and endanger even our troops. Thus immediate
evacuation of camp of 1,200 Jews in Sabac necessary, since
Sabac is battle area, and in surroundings rebellious gangs
several thousand men strong identified. On the other hand,
Jews contribute demonstrably in large measure to unrest in
the country. After Jews were removed from Banat, especially
harmful rumour-mongering stopped immediately here in Serbia.
Deportation first of all male Jews is essential precondition
for restoration of orderly conditions. Therefore urgently
repeat my request. In case of renewed refusal only
immediate deportation to Generalgouvernement or Russia
remains, which might, however, cause considerable transport
difficulties. Otherwise operation against Jews must be
deferred for the time being, which contradicts the orders
given me by Foreign Minister.”
I direct the attention of the Court to the remark in the
margin. It says here, over Rademacher’s initials: Section
III D: Please speak to the RSHA and report. Signed –
Luther, 12 September. And Rademacher adds:

“In the opinion of Sturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, RSHA
IVD4, there is no possibility to take them to Russia or
to the Generalgouvernement. Even Jews from Germany
cannot be accommodated there. Eichmann proposes to
kill them by shooting.”

I draw the Court’s attention to the Statement of the Accused
concerning this document, which begins on page 2352, and
especially to two passages on pages 2355 and 2356.

Presiding Judge: What did he say there?

State Attorney Bar-Or: I shall gladly read these sentences.
On page 2355 he says:

“Yes, I must have apparently passed this matter on.
According to what is said, that is also perfectly clear
to me. Then it was apparently said: There is no choice
except killing by shooting.”

In the next passage, on page 2356, he says:

“Yes, certainly. So I just want to add this for the
sake of clarity, although it should actually be
superfluous: It was not I who gave this order to kill
by shooting on my initiative, but like all such
matters, I dealt with it through official channels, and
the reply from my superiors was: Kill by shooting.”

The Accused could find no rest after he was interrogated on
this matter, and on 14 September 1960, he wishes to say more
regarding the document. The additions begin on page 2417 in
his Statement. He mainly expresses his astonishment at the
strange minute which, in his opinion, was not an ordinary
minute that one would write down as laconically as
Rademacher had done.

Rademacher was interrogated about this subject in Nuremberg.
The letter was shown to him, and he made a statement, which
he wrote himself, before an interrogator on behalf of the
American authorities by the name of Dr. Max Mandellaub,
Prosecutor on behalf of the American authorities. I should
like to submit a photocopy of this statement, together with
a written declaration by Dr. Max Mandellaub, contained in
document No. 1244. This written declaration actually
reproduces, word by word, these exhibits, which were
documents of the N.G. in Nuremberg. Dr. Mandellaub says
here that when he had asked Rademacher: “Give an explanation
for this,” there followed a lengthy discussion. In the end
this lengthy discussion was put on paper by Rademacher, and
this document contains everything that he added on this
subject. There are other matters here, which are connected
with Trial No. 11, in which all this formed part of the
Wilhelmstrasse Case, and these are of no interest to us. Of
interest to us is mainly the last passage on page 3 of
Rademacher’s Statement, a general description of the
functions of the Foreign Ministry as against the functions
of the Accused. This was explained in concise form by
Rademacher on the last page of our document. It should be
mentioned that this was written by Rademacher in Nuremberg
on 26 July 1948. The trial was the last one of the
Supplementary Trials, No. 11, which brought to an end the
American Military Trials in Nuremberg. Rademacher himself
was put on trial in Germany.

Judge Halevi: By whom?

State Attorney Bar-Or: He was put on trial by a German
court, was sentenced to 28 months imprisonment, if I am not
mistaken, was released on bail until sentence – and escaped
before the punishment could be carried out. We do not know
his whereabouts today. There are various rumours, but I can
say nothing definite about him. I should just like to add
two points, in order to support my request that this
document be accepted at the present stage. First, the
document is of no small value for the Accused also. The
simple words “Eichmann proposes” find their place against a
certain background of events in Belgrade which I can only
demonstrate in this document. I hope that, for this reason,
there will be no strong objection on the part of the Defence
to the submission of the document in accordance with Section
15. The Court is certainly familiar with Rademacher and his
cooperation with the Accused, and I think that it
appreciates the probative value inherent in this statement
of his. It therefore seems to me that this document
deserves to be accepted on the basis of the special power of
the Court, and I request that this be done.

Presiding Judge: Dr. Servatius, what is your position?

Dr. Servatius: I have no objection. I shall express my
opinion as to the value of the document at a later stage.

Presiding Judge:

Decision No. 40

We decide to accept the statement by Rademacher by virtue of
Section 15 of the Nazi and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment)
Law 5710-1950.

This document No. will be marked T/875.

State Attorney Bar-Or: Thank you, Your Honour. The Court
will perhaps permit me to read two short passages from the
document. One is the penultimate passage on page 3, which

“I was called for 13 September in order to give my
report concerning BLTS/ 3552 based on Luther’s note of
12 September” – the one which I already quoted before
the Court from the previous document. “I still
remember exactly,” says Rademacher, “that I was sitting
opposite him when I telephoned the Head Office for
Reich Security, and that I wrote down key words from
Eichmann’s reply and passed them over to Luther during
the telephone conversation. Eichmann said words to the
effect that the army was responsible for order in
Serbia, and that it would just have to kill rebellious
Jews by shooting. In reply to my further question, he
repeated simply: ‘Kill by shooting’ and hung up” (i.e.,
hung up the receiver).”

On the last page it says:

“In addition to the German Section (Referat), Luther
headed the Special Section, i.e., the reorganization of
the Foreign Ministry. In this position Luther was
directly responsible to Ribbentrop as the liaison with
the Ministry of Propaganda. I should like to point out
that the German Section – as distinct from other
sections in the Foreign Ministry – was not only a
liaison office with various civilian agencies, but that
it was the section which had the real authority over
the various functions mentioned above. For instance,
it was generally responsible for Jewish questions, with
the exception of matters having economic or propaganda
character. These belonged to what was called the
Central Authority for Jewish Emigration.
“The authority for German Jewish policy in Europe as such
was, in accordance with a decree by the Fuehrer
(Fuehrererlass), Eichmann’s section in the Head Office for
Reich Security alone. The Foreign Ministry could only
submit objections to this section, if they were based on
foreign policy considerations, and if the objections in
individual cases were well founded. I myself worked in
Section D III from the beginning of 1940 until the beginning
of 1943.”

Presiding Judge: We will stop now. As I announced
yesterday, we shall begin tomorrow at 8.30 and finish at

Last-Modified: 1999/06/02