"Non-Germans" Under the Third Reich (210 page)

9.
Cf. speech by Frank on July 23, 1940, in Kraków (reproduced in Poliakov and Wulf,
Das Dritte Reich und die Juden
[1955], 178 ff), according to which he initially rejected outright any thought of Germanizing the General Government. Cf. working meeting February 25, 1940, quoted from
Doc. Occ
. 6:159 n. 3. The Germanization plan was originally drawn up for the time
after
the Germanization of the Annexed Eastern Territories (Frank to the meeting of departmental heads of April 12, 1940 [160 n. 6]) though later affirmed unreservedly as the goal of German policy after the war (Frank to a meeting of police officers, May 30, 1940 [160 n. 7]: “I speak quite openly of Germanization”). In contrast to this, cf. Frank’s statement to a meeting on October 9, 1940 (160 n. 8: “It is clear that we will neither denationalize nor Germanize”). Cf. also Frank’s statement on March 25, 1941 (“Tagebuch 1941,” I;
Doc. Occ
. 6:160 n. 9: “The Führer is resolved to make this area an all-German country in the course of the next 15–20 years…. This gives a complete transformation of the purpose of our work in this area”), on December 16, 1941 (161 n. 11: “For it has become quite clear that in the near future this area, the General Government, is destined to become part of the settlement program of our people, part of the progress of German ethnic groups in the East”), and on March 11, 1942 (reproduced on 161 n. 12: “The national problem in the General Government must be seen exclusively in light of the area’s ultimate destiny as a German resettlement zone…. That of course is only possible because … [the] Poles and Ukrainians … are being removed from the area. If we already had peace… we would have a free hand, also in matters of ethnic policy”). For an account of the concept of Germanization, see Madajczyk,
Polityka
, 1:287 ff., 453 ff.

10.
W. Hallbauer, in
Das Generalgouvernement
, no. 1 (1944): 12 ff., 17 (University Library, Warsaw, Sign. 011248).

11.
“Creation of a regular network of local centers throughout the area,” whose role was to be “the direct expression of German hegemony” (Schepers, head of the Central Department for Urban Planning in the General Government, in
Krakauer Zeitung
, March 6, 1942). These local centers were to be strictly divided into German and non-German residential districts. According to the very advanced development plans, the church was no longer to be the center of the new districts; the center would be the headquarters of the
Kreishauptmann
, with a parade ground and public buildings (cf. Gollert,
Warschau unter deutscher Herrschaft
[1942], 236). In this connection see the instruction of the district leader of Warsaw in October 1940 about the formation of a German and a closed Jewish district (ghetto) (
Warschauer Zeitung
, October 16, 1942). Cf. also a letter from the RFSS to Governor General Frank in November 1939, according to which Lublin was earmarked to become a German town by 1944, with 20–25% of the population German by 1944, rising to 30–40% in later years, compared with 10–15% in the present day (1939). In Himmler’s view, the resettlement of the indigenous population (Operation Werewolf) should be started before the end of the war (Nuremberg doc., NO-2444). Lemberg was planned as a future Eastern European center (for further details, see Hallbauer, in
Das Generalgouvernement
, no. 1 [1944]: 10 ff., 17, University Library, Warsaw, Sign. 011248).

12.
Cf. discussion held on February 4, 1942, in the Reich Ministry for the Occupied Eastern Territories (i.e., the large tracts of the western Soviet Union occupied by the Nazis) with representatives of the ministry, the offices of the RKF, the RSHA, etc., “concerning Germanization, in particular in the Baltic countries” (Nuremberg doc., NO-2525). Drawing on ancient Sparta as a model, it had the Germans as the Spartans (the ruling elite), and the Latvians, Estonians, etc., as the “perioecians” (the middle class); the Russians were allocated the role of “helots” (the serfs)—the same model is readily applicable to the relationship between Germans and Poles.

Part One. Section 3. Introduction. III. Legal Status

1.
Cf. Albert Weh, in
Übersicht über das Recht des Generalgouvernements
(1943) (loose-leaf collection), A 120 n. 2.

2.
A. Weh, in
Das GG, seine Verwaltung und seine Wirtschaft
(Kraków, 1943), 64 ff.; Kundt, “Entstehung, Probleme, Grundsätze und Form der Gestaltung des Generalgouvernements,”
Die Burg
, no. 2 (1944): 47 (University Library, Warsaw); cf. also Klein, “Zur Stellung des Generalgouvernements” (1941), 253.

3.
By decree of the governor general, August 15, 1940 (Weh,
Übersicht über das Recht des Generalgouvernements
, A 102), the addendum “… for the occupied Polish territories” was dropped and the areas renamed General Government.

4.
Klein, “Zur Stellung des Generalgouvernements” (1941), 254, 252, 255; in this sense see also von Medeazza, “Ein Jahr Generalgouvernement” (1940).

5.
RGZ 167, 274.

6.
International law recognizes three ways in which a subject with status under international law can cease to exist: loss of national territory, dissolution of the legal system, and so-called
debellatio
. The latter occurs when a state relinquishes its functions as the result of defeat in war (Anzilotti,
Lehrbuch des Völkerrechts
[1929], 137). For Poland the requirements were not fulfilled, since the Polish government in exile in London was recognized as the legitimate government of Poland by numerous states, and certain state functions (including the organization of armed forces) were exercised.

7.
Pungs, Buchholz, and Wolany,
Ostrechtspflegeverordnung
(1943), 4.

8.
Klein, “Zur Stellung des Generalgouvernements,” 228 f., 252 f.

9.
Cf. Guggenheim,
Lehrbuch des Völkerrechts
(1948), 403 ff.; P. Guggenheim,
Die völkerrechtliche Lehre vom Staatenwechsel
(1925), 27 ff.; Kelsen,
Théorie générale du droit international publique
(1932), 316; Oppenheim and Lauterpacht,
International Law
, 7th ed. (1952), 2:252; Dahm,
Völkerrecht
(1958), 1:91; Verdross,
Völkerrecht
(1964), 250 f.; Strupp and Schlochauer,
Wörterbuch des Völkerrechts
(1960–61), 2:776; Department of State, Bulletin, November 4, 1939, 458 (quoted from Steiniger and Leszczy
ski,
Das Urteil im Juristenprozeß
[1969], 170); judgment of the Polish Supreme People’s Court, July 9, 1946, against Arthur Greiser, quoted from
Arbeitsübersetzung
, ZS, AZ I, 110 AR 655/73.

10.
Speech to the Reichstag, October 6, 1939 (
Der großdeutsche Freiheitskampf. Reden Adolf Hitlers
, vols. 1 and 2 in a single edition [1942], 94).

11.
Klein, “Zur Stellung des Generalgouvernements,” 252 f.; cf. also Walz,
Völkerrechtsordnung und Nationalsozialismus
(1942); Schmitt, “Raum und Großraum im Völkerrecht” (1941).

12.
Cf. letter from Reich minister and head of the Reich Chancellery to the Supreme Reich Authorities, June 22, 1942 (Nuremberg doc., NG-3454). The Górales were people from the region of the mountain Góralen in southern Poland.

13.
State Secretary Ernst Freiherr von Weizäcker, Foreign Office, at a meeting of state secretaries of the Reich authorities (Nuremberg doc., NG-4330).

14.
This was directed, generally speaking, against the theory of international law prevalent in the West, which was considered “liberalistic” and weak. This gave rise to provocative comments about the dwindling significance of neutrality, the tendency toward regional organization, and the “surfeit” of international agreements. Cf. Nußbaum,
Geschichte des Völkerrechts
(1960), 313 ff.; Gott, “The National Socialist Theory of International Law” (1938), 704; Walz, “Die Inflation im Völkerrecht der Nachkriegszeit” (1939).

15.
The concept of
Großraum
(sphere of imperial expansion) is used above all by Carl Schmitt. On this subject and also on the theory of the
Großraum
, cf. Schmitt, “Völkerrechtliche Großraumordnung” (1941), 145; Schmitt, “Großraum gegen ‘Universalismus’ ” (1939); Schmitt, “Reich und Raum” (1940); Schmitt, “Raum und Großraum im Völkerrecht” (1941); Schmitt, “Die Raumrevolution” (1940). In this sense see also Maunz, “Verfassung und Organisation im Großraum” (1941), which refers to the “leading and equilibrating role” of the Reich “toward the subject peoples.” For more details, see Freisler, “Die Idee des Reiches” (1940), 253; Grewe, “Der Reichsbegriff im Völkerrecht” (1939); Daitz, “Echte und unechte Großräume” (1942); Höhn, “Reich—Großraum—Großmacht” (1942); R. Diener, “Das Reich und Europa,”
Reich-Volksordnung-Lebensraum
2 (1942): 360 ff.; R. Diener, “Reichsverfassung und Großraumverwaltung im Altertum,”
Reich-Volksordnung-Lebensraum
2 (1942): 177 ff.; Stuckart, “Die Neuordnung der Kontinente” (1941); H. Friedl, “Der Raum als Gestalter der Innen- und Außenpolitik,”
Reich-Volksordnung-Lebensraum
1 (1941): 349 ff.; H. Krüger, “Der Raum als Innen- und Außenpolitik,”
Reich-Volksordnung-Lebensraum
1 (1941): 77 ff.; R. Höhn, “Großraumordnung und völkisches Rechtsdenken,”
Reich-Volksordnung-Lebensraum
1 (1941): 256 ff.; Suthof and Groß, “Deutsche Großraumlehre und Großraumpolitik” (1943); Best, “Nochmals” (1941); Dietze, “Die Entwicklung des Sonderrechts im Kriege” (1944) (Lebensraum as the central concept of the new National Socialist Großreich). The right of the “leading power” to expand could justify every future annexation policy in a purported (though misleading) analogy to the American Monroe Doctrine and also to the administration of occupied Eastern European (for further details, see L. Gruchmann, “Nationalsozialistische Großraumordnung” [1962]).

16.
Klein, “Zur Stellung des Generalgouvernements,” 229.

17.
Speech by Frank on August 3, 1943, reproduced in
Dokumente der deutschen Politik
(1943), 597 ff., 598; Klein, “Zur Stellung des Generalgouvernements,” 233.

18.
“Ordnung der Gesetze und Gebräuche des Landkrieges zum Haager Abkommen, betreffend die Gesetze und Gebräuche des Landkrieges,” October 18, 1907 (
RGBl
. 1910, 107). “Abkommen über die Behandlung von Kriegsgefangenen,” July 27, 1929 (
RGBl
. I 1934, II 207).

19.
Freisler, “Grundsätzliches zur Ministerratsverordnung” (1941).

20.
RGBl
. I 2077.

21.
Kundt, “Entstehung, Probleme, Grundsätze und Form der Verwaltung des GG,” in Bühler,
Das GG, seine Verwaltung und seine Wirtschaft
(1943). Klein, “Zur Stellung des Generalgouvernements,” 262.

22.
The governor general was independent of the Reich administration and combined all authority in his person (sec. 5 of the Führer decree on the administration of the occupied Polish territories, issued on October 12, 1939,
RGBl.
I 2077). The General Government had foreign exchange, currency, customs, and economic borders, and in that respect was a foreign country (instruction no. 3 issued by the head of the Foreign Exchange Control Office in the office of the governor general, November 20, 1939,
VBl. GG
[1939]: 55; decree on customs legislation, November 7, 1939 [92]); it had its own police borders with the Reich and its own postal and rail administration; in other ways, too, it was discrete from the Reich (decree of October 26, 1939 [7], amended by decree of October 29, 1941,
VBl. GG
[1941]: 619); decree of September 4, 1941 (511 ff.). Numerous regulations were modeled on those of a foreign state (decree of September 13, 1940,
VBl. GG
1 [1940]: 289); for more details, see instruction of the district president of Kattowitz (Katowice), August 5, 1940 (
Amtsblatt Reg./Präs. Kattowitz 1940
, 27, no. 237, University Library, Warsaw, Sign. 034693), on the granting of judicial and administrative assistance to the courts of the German Reich; the governor general was represented by a “plenipotentiary” in Berlin. However, the General Government had no non-derivative powers, as all its sovereign authority was obtained from the Reich (sec. 3 of the Führer decree of October 12, 1939,
RGBl.
I 2077), and it remained wholly dependent on the Reich for allocation of personnel and resources. Its large measure of administrative autonomy and the many examples of the leadership’s high-handed attitudes had no effect on this (cf. report by RMuChdRkzlei, April 12, 1943, listing the failures of the German administration in the General Government, sent to the
Reichsführer
-SS on April 17, 1943. Among other things, this accused the governor general of having wanted to make the General Government completely independent from the Reich. He is said to have referred to himself as “head of state” [IfZ, Bestand Pers. Stab/RFSS, MA 300, 4008 ff.]).