 |
| [prose…] cution to place General Woehler in the dock? Was it not
merely the fact that, presumably owing to political reasons, it had been found
impossible to indict the Commander in Chief of the 11th Army, Field Marshal von
Manstein, or his superior, the Commander in Chief of the German Ground Forces,
Field Marshal von Brauchitsch? Both field marshals are living, so that there
are no grounds to maintain that, in the place of a superior who has died, at
least his collaborators should be taken to task so that somebody may be
indicted. General Woehler’s qualifications as a substitute are thereby
indicated. But there is no such thing as criminal guilt by way of substitution.
A similar phenomenon in the realm of Himmler, known as
“Sippenhaftung” (clan responsibility), is today being denounced by
these very Tribunals as violating the laws of humanity. This in itself should
provide sufficient reason for the Tribunal to experience particular misgivings
with respect to the indictment of General Woehler; and I would therefore
respectfully ask that the question as to whether General Woehler bears any
guilt under criminal law in the happenings within the area of the 11th Army be
given especially critical consideration. |
| |
| * * *
* * * *
* * * |
| |
| F. Opening Statement for Defendant Warlimont* |
| |
| DR. LEVERKUEHN : The case against the German generals in all the
counts of the indictment and in its historical background is a repetition of
the proceedings before the International Military Tribunal against Goering
et al., though on a different level The case against Goering was
directed against the persons who were responsible for the political decisions
and the building up of the Nazi regime. The generals were neither responsible
for political decisions nor for the Nazi regime. But the prosecution takes
great pains to picture the political background in such a way as if they had
been responsible, by portraying them as members of a group or organization that
exerted, and had for a long time exerted, a decisive influence on the history
of Germany. This contention utterly misrepresents the facts. In the history of
all countries military men have played their role in the political field, too.
The Duke of Wellington was not only Britain’s greatest soldier, but for a
long period Prime Minister. British generals were Viceroys of India and held
other positions of responsibility in the Empire. The first President of the
United States was the general of the forces of the Revolutionary War. Ulysses
S. Grant who brought the Civil War to an end was President for two terms.
|
| —————————— |
* Tr. pp. 6264-6274, 18 June
1948.
218 |
. 
