|
House of Habsburg |
|
|
Kroiher, Erik Sidney Aspects of the involvement of the House of Habsburg in the activities of the Austrian Resistance 1938 – 1945 BIBLIOTHEK Dokementationarchiv Des osterreichischen Widerstandes Contents
Abstract When Austria was occupied by Nazi Germany in March 1938, the House of Habsburg who ruled Austria until 1918 became actively involved in resistance activities against National Socialism. Their actions have caused different interpretations ever since. Whereas some historians propagate the thesis that the political work of the Imperial Family was of the greatest significance in the eventual rebirth of Austria, others argue the opposite case. Many opinions are based simply on general attitudes and emotions. In this essay I will try to discuss the actions of the Habsburgs during the period from 1938 – 1945 with reference to both internal and external events by using information from documents, original newspapers, interviews and books. I will pay special attention to the relations of Archduke Otto von Habsburg with the Schuschnigg government before and after the invasion, the Habsburg intervention in France between 1938 and 1940 and the reaction of the Daladier government. The contracts to the British government and American authorities, especially President Roosevelt will be examined carefully. A discussion of their achievements as well as their failures and of the role of the Imperial Family in the organization of the Austrian resistance will bring me to the conclusion that the House of Habsburg indeed played a significant role in the process of Austria’s rebirth, although I should not consider a single group to have been most important in the resistance and agitation as I believe cardinal measurements of that kind of historical events is not appropriate. Essay In the eyes of many people, the Habsburg family had vanished from the stage of world politics in November 1918, when the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy collapsed. This assumption becomes rather disputable if one is examining more closely the political events that followed the First World War. Especially the period of the Nazi-occupation of Austria and the Second World War shows considerable activities of the Imperial Family particularly in the fields of diplomacy and in the organization of resistance against Hitler. However many historians hold very different opinions as to the success of these activities and their significance. In this essay I shall be trying to display a picture of the Habsburg efforts in fighting Nazism. Which is based on mainly primary but also secondary sources to set up an evidence-based evaluation. Before entering the process of investigating the time from 1938 to 1945 it is necessary to give a brief history of the House of Habsburg-Lorraine (Lotheringen). The dynasty’s origin reaches back in history as far as 1273, when Rudolph I of Habsburg was crowned German King. With a few exceptions, the title remained in the family. Finally in 1452 Fredrick III was crowned Roman Emperor ---------- the House of Luxembourg. The Habsburgs continued to be the sovereigns of the Holy Roman Empire until 1806 when Emperor Francis II proclaimed the end of Charlemagne’s Empire, as in anticipation of which Leopold II’s successor Francis II had in 1804 begun to style himself hereditary Emperor of Austria. The House of Austria possessed vast areas, too, which were their hereditary dominions since the family’s possessions had been divided between the Austrian and the Spanish line in 1556. Therefore at the latest since Queen Maria Theresia of Hungary and Archduchess of Austria etc., her dominions had established themselves as a powerful unity. Through Maria Theresia’s marriage with Francis Stephen I of Lothringen who was elected Roman Emperor, the family name became Habsburg-Lothringen. From 1700 to 1866Austria was a most influential Great Power. But after that time Austria, or, to be correct, the Austro-Hungarian Dual Monarchy (1867) was slowly but constantly declining, after a series of political and military defeats and growing unrest within he country. In 1889 the Empire lost its heir to the throne, Emperor Francis Joseph I’s only son Rudolph, who either committed suicide or was murdered – an incident which has not yet been cleared up completely. The aging Emperor’s nephew, Archduke Francis Ferdinand, who became pretender to the Imperial and Royal throne, was assassinated in Sarajevo on June 28th, 1914. Consequently, the First World War was triggered off. In 1916 Archduke Otto von Habsburg’s father, Karl, became Emperor of Austria and Apostolic King of Hungary and therefore his eldest son Otto the heir to the throne of the empire. After the collapse of the Danube Monarchy the Imperial Family was forced to leave Austria on November 11th, 1918. However, the emperor “only refused to take part in any governmental affairs but did not really abdicate.” (2) The Emperor, his consort and their children went via Eckhartsau Castle into then Swiss exile in 1919. One year later, the Emperor, who was also Karl IV of Hungary, made two unsuccessful attempts to restore the monarchy in Hungary in March and October 1920, which resulted in his deportation to Madeira, where Emperor and King Karl died a few months later, on April 1st, 1922. The Imperial Family was banned from visiting Austria and their property was confiscated by the new Republic. In the years between 1922 and 1938 the Habsburgs lived in Lequeto in Spain and in Steenockerzeel in Belgium. Besides close contacts to the Austria and Hungarian legitimist movements, the Habsburgs did not directly try to intervene in the current political affairs of Austria. This changed immediately with the growing danger of an annexation of Austria by Nazi Germany in the second half of the 1930’s. The events that took place in the last few years before the Anschlub. The Schuschnigg regime came under continuous pressure from both interior and exterior forces. Italy’s support for the government of the “Patriotic Front” (VF), which represented a system similar to Mussolini’s fascist state, was diminishing as the relations between German and Italy improved. As a result, Austria was becoming more and more isolated in her diplomatic battle for securing the country’s independence from Germany. Austria was faced with a major campaign organized by Nazi Germany with the aim to prepare the country for a Nazi-takeover and to weaken the government. The Western powers were not to sympathetic towards Schuschnigg’s Patriotic Front either, as it exercised a rather authoritarian rule and had in the recent past often supported Italy against Britain and France. Internally, public discontent was growing too. Two strong groups were strictly opposing and, indeed, campaigning against the Chancellor’s single party system. The Social Democrats on one hand and the German Nationalist/Deutechnationals together with the Nazi Party on the other. Although the Social Democrats strictly opposed Hitler, the idea of the >>Anschlub<< was supported by leading Socialist politicians (April 3rd, 1938) in an interview wit the Viennese newspaper >>Neus Wiener Tagblatt<<, the former Chancellor of State, Dr. Karl Renner approves of the so-called plebiscite determining Austria’s incorporation into the German Reich (>> vote in favor <<)(3). The leader of the “The organization of Revolutionary socialists”, the exiled Otto Bauer, expressed the view that “…the victory of Socialism could not be fulfilled by the reactionary desire to re-establish an independent Austria but only be the panger man revolution”(4). Here it is necessary to add that there were also leading socialists such as Heinrich Allina and Karl Hartl who were totally against the >>Anschlub<<. The Nazi Party was, of course, the strongest pressure group calling for Austria to be incorporated into the Reich as soon as possible. Both camps were forbidden by the government consisting of the two right wing organizations of the Christian Social (>>Christlichsoziale Partei<<) and the >>Heimwehren<<, the latter a paramilitary patriotic group. Also within Schuschnigg’s own ranks there were numerous influential people who fancied an integration of Austria and the German Reich. Faced with that situation, Schuschnigg got in touch with the head of the House of Habsburg, Otto. The Chancellor seriously considered Otto’s offer to take over the chancellorship on February 17th, 1938. As legitimate successor of a dynasty which ruled Austria for 650 years and as the son of my late father,… it is impossible for me not to face what is my inherited duty… I would like to encourage you to hand over to me the chancellorship so that, without changing the constitution, the situation would be as advantageous as it would be through a formal restoration of monarchy … (5). This indirectly also stressed Otto von Habsburg’s claim on the Austrian throne, a fact that would cause many disputes in the future. However in 1938, the monarchist Schuschnigg saw Archduke Otto as the only person who could manage to unite the resistance against Hitler’s obvious plans to annex Austria, and, due to the Archduke’s good relations with many foreign politicians, as the only person to get support from the Western Powers. But the Archduke had many opponents too. Especially Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, and Romania opposed a return of Habsburg to Austria. Military intervention of these powers in reaction to such an event seemed not to be impossible. Schuschnigg’s claim, the only reason why he supported the Legitimists was to provide an area of resistance against the Nazis, did not justify many other governments, either (6). However, Schuschnigg did not decide to let Otto von Habsburg take over governmental responsibility (7). Meanwhile, in Germany, Hitler was very much aware of the political threat to his expansion plans which was posed by a possible return of Habsburg to Austria. Therefore the >>Anschlub<< was given the code name ..Operation Otto<<. Hitler wrote in a letter to the German High Command,
Indeed, one day after this message, the troops of Nazi Germany (Hitler’s 8th Army) invaded Austria. The Schuschnigg cabinet had resigned the night before and ordered no open resistance to be undertaken against the Germans (“Ich weiche der Gewalt”) (9). Besides, great parts of the population approved of the >>Anschlub<<. The political Engagement of the House of Habsburg in Europe The evaluation of the Habsburg involvement in organizing resistance against Hitler is still an object of quarrel in the opinions of different historians; especially the views of Austrian experts on that issue are deeply divided. There are two main approaches to the question of Habsburg involvement in Austrian resistance. A group of historians propagate the thesis that without the diplomatic efforts of the House of Austria the country would not have been resurrected after the war. A supporter of this attitude is Professor Erich Feigl who proves by the use of documents, letters and interviews that there was nobody in Austria who contributed so much to the defense and to the resurrection of Austria as Otto and his Family (10). Another group holds the opinion that Otto von Habsburg’s interventions were not very significant and did more damage to Austria than they helped the country, “Otto Habsburg’s efforts mainly served the purpose to restore the monarchy and to re-establish pre-World War One conditions” (11). These two statements show clearly that there exists a major problem in the historical evaluation of the activities of the House of Austria. It is therefore necessary to investigate the nature of the events between 1938 and 1945 from a barely factual point of view before conclusions can be drawn. As soon ad the >>Anschlub<< was proclaimed and the Austrian justice system was replaced by the German, Otto von Habsburg was declared a traitor and a warrant was issued. Otto, who had been staying in Switzerland for the last few weeks before the German invasion, left for France and got in touch with French officials. His main concern was to secure the Western Power’s support for the resurrection of an independent Austria State. His brother, Archduke Felix, who had been attending the military academy of Wiener Neustadt, managed to leave Austria immediately after the >>Anschlub<< through a secret diplomatic intervention of the Hungarian Embassy. Archduke Robert, Otto’s and Felix’ brother, meanwhile went to England to get in touch with the Foreign Secretary Lord Halifax. Due to the intervention of Prince Felix of Luxembourg who was a friend of Lord Halifax, the Lord agreed to help in persuading the German authorities, who then were interested in being on good terms with the British, to allow leading members of the Austrian Legitimist Movement to leave the country. Through that way many people who had already been arrested by the Nazis could be released and continue their efforts against Nazism from abroad. To the better understanding of the political scene in Austria it is important to explain the nature of the Legitimist Movement. This was an organization of people who worked for the restoration of monarchy as they believed this type of system was the righteous one and the best to secure the peaceful development of the state. “In theory, legitimism differs from the notion of monarchism in so far that monarchism is a general political theory, whereas legitimism (lex, legis-moral, divine right) can be characterized by its supporters’ loyalty to the ‘legitimate’ heir to the throne, their sovereign. This difference, however, played a very little role during the time of 1938 and 1945. (12)”. The legitimists were by no means opposing the principles of democracy in terms of governing a state, but believed that it was the Devine Right of a king to be the head of state. It is easy to explain why they were against Nazism: The Nazi propagated a totalitarian state in which the government, the head of state and the ideology had to be universal and had to rest in the hands of the same people. In the Nazi’s views the former system had to be abolished and society was to be transformed in a revolutionary way. Legitimists saw no future in radical change and opposed revolution. Furthermore, total power and the concentration of all responsibilities and bodies of a state in the hands of a simple group was very suspect to them, as in their view the prosperity of a country depended on these conditions: The church, the dynastic principal of monarchy and the democratic system of a temporarily elected government (although their major concerns were the first two). For all these reasons the legitimists were fierce enemies of the Nazi dictatorship. The people most respected by the representatives of legitimism were the members of the House of Austria in which they saw their sovereigns. To large parts of the resistance, Archduke Otto and HM Empress Zita therefore became the symbols f opposition to the Nazi tyrants. The members of the Imperial Family had various fields and places of work. Archduke Otto was, as I mentioned earlier, getting in touch with leading French politicians such as Daladier. It was made clear that the Habsburg interventions, although being pushed forward by people of a monarchist background, “didn’t regard the necessity of the restoration of the monarchy as a condition for their work” (13) Prime Minister Daladier agreed that an Austrian military unit could be established within the French Armed Forces and a very detailed plan was set up describing the nature of that unit. The legitimist resistance coordinators were also allowed to issue their own newspaper, >>Die Osterreichishe Post<<. Daladier’s support for the Habsburg cause, the resurrection of an independent Austria, finally mounted in France’s declaration of a free Austria, based on the declarations of the League of Nations on February 17th, 1934, September 27th, 1934, the Stresa Conference on April 14th, 1935 and finally, the Anglo-French declaration of February 3rd, 1935, in which all acknowledged the absolute necessity of an independent Austrian state. While in France and Belgium, the Austrian Emperor’s eldest son also established his links to the monarchist resistance groups within Austria. In the beginning there were three major assistance groups which were led by Baron Karl Burian, Wilheim von Hebra and Franz Waschnigg. “The active core of the Legitimists was composed of the nobility, former World War One officers, and some Catholic clergy. There was a good deal of personal and ideological continuity in the clandestine work.” (14) Although battered by the Gestapo (Burian and Hebra were arrested together with some 200 Legitimists), the resistance groups, who were in constant touch with Otto von Habsburg, managed to be active throughout the entire period of occupation. The monarchists (it was at this time possible to use the terms monarchist and legitimist alternatively for the Habsburg oriented resistance) in alliance with other groups opposing the Nazi dictatorship such as the Roman Catholic Youth and Social Democratic circles, were apart from bringing oppositionary propaganda into circulation, successful in organizing public actions. “After a football match in autumn 1938 (>>Rapid<< versus >>Schalke 04<<) a great demonstration against the >>Anschlub<< was launched of which we knew in advance.” (15) In Winter 1938/1939 the different groups of Monarchist resistance were partly assembled within the >>Free Austrian Movement<<(FAM), where the names of Roman Scholz and Adolf Worobil, who did a great deal of coordination, must not remain unmentioned. The central leadership waas claimed by Johann Muller, who headed one of the most significant monarchist movements. Although many close contacts existed between the different groups, such as the FAM’s connection with the so called Mayer-Thanner network and their cooperation with the Catholic peasant circles, it would be wrong to assume that there was a centrally unified monarchist resistance. The only two people who can be considered to have been central organizers were Archduke Otto and Franz Waschnigg. “However the broad base of the movements also left them vulnerable to Gestapo informers.” (16) As mentioned previously, the monarchist groups, which also often worked together with other resistance circles even the Communists, were of considerable danger to the Nazis, as they admitted themselves. Above all the clericals and the legitimists must be viewed today as our truly active opponents.” (17) Achievements on governmental bases As the Austrian Head of State in 1938, President Wilhelm Miklas, had refused to dismiss the Schuschnigg government and therefore not appointed Arthur Seib-Inquart, a high ranking Nazi leader, as new chancellor, the conditions for the Austrian Constitution were not satisfied. The chancellor had dissolved his own government and allowed Seifb-Inquart to form a new one. A fact which is illegal according to the Austrian Constitution of 1929. So, in theory, the former government was still in office. This has often been denied by other politicians and some historians, but was constitutionally in order. Otto, reaffirming the illegality of the >>Anschlub<<, attempted to set up an Austrian government in exile, which was seen to be a vital step in order to safeguard the national independence. As almost all members of the Austrian government, including both Schuschnigg and President Miklas, were imprisoned, the oldest and highest ranking member who was in exile, Hans Rott, was to takeover the government in exile until the restoration of the normal order (18). However, the Socialists never accepted the memorandum because of their firm opposition to the authoritarian right wing Schuschnigg government. It also failed to gain international recognition due to the quarrel over its legality which was going on within the Austrian emigrants. Archduke Robert’s field of operation was England, where he immediately got in touch with the British government officials. Later on an application to join the Royal Air Force was granted by the Ministry of Aviation (19). The Archduke’s main objective was to get British assurance of their determination to reinstall an independent Austria after the war. But in England, unlike in France, the official reaction towards the Imperial Family was initially very cool, although their political and social rank was acknowledged. For a long time the Foreign Office refused to arrange a meeting between Robert and Prime Minister Winston Churchill (20). However, Winston Churchill’s attitude towards the House of Austria and their political aims was rather positive, and there exists evidence that British officials, especially Anthony Eden, deliberately destroyed contacts between Britain’s Prime Minister and the Habsburgs (21) for reasons which will be discussed later in the essay. In an autobiographical note Otto writes “The importance of my brother’s tireless work in London … can not be over-estimated. Robert … had to deal with one of our bitterest enemies. Anthony Eden who had absolutely no desire for a restoration of Austria. The fact that England finally supported the pro-Austrian policy is due to Robert’s work with Winston Churchill (22). Meanwhile, the Habsburg Family had to move their headquarters from Steenockerzeel and Paris over to the United States, as Belgium and France were conquered by Hitler’s invading armies. In fact, the family managed to escape just in time, and the Nazis particularly searched for the House of Austria. Another important factor that has to be dealt with, is indeed the financial side. Where did the financial supplies come from that enabled the Habsburgs to continue their battle against National Socialism, since the family had been deprived of property in 1918 ? It is quite difficult to come up with a definite answer as this has not been covered by many documents or books, but one could divide resources into two different groups. Due to Emperor Karl’s and Empress Zita’s direct family relations to the Royal Families of Belgium and Luxembourg and to many very wealthy members of Europe’s high aristocracy, money was provided from these people. On the other hand, many influential financiers among those many Americans, sponsored the Habsburg cause. Here … the Rothchild family should not be unmentioned. In these matters Empress Zita played the role of a go-between. The Habsburg resistance was coordinated by the head of the family, Otto, and every member of the family had to fulfill a certain task. “Otto’s political activities were based on a teamwork with his brother Felix in Lisbon, Robert and Karl-Ludwig. Karl-Ludwig spent the whole war time in Lisbon, apart from the first part of 1943, when he served in the >>Austrian Battalion<<. There he was the contact person between the monarchist resistance in Austria and Hungary on one hand and the exiled monarchist on the other (23). The Political Engagement of the House of Austria in the United States and Canada Another field of operation was America. In 1940 and again from 1943 to 1945 Archduke Otto and Empress Zita stayed in Washington and New York, following an invitation of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Assisted by two of Otto’s most faithful confidants, Count Alexander Pallavichini and Count Heinrich Degenfeld, the >>Free Austria Movement<< was established in the USA to represent the Austrian Legitimist resistance there. This organization was opposed by the republican >>Austrian Action<< in which Ferdinand Czernin was a leading character. The latter was a confidant of Edvard Benes who was the most defiant enemy of the Habsburgs. Benes is often considered the leader of the “Anti-Habsburg-League” in the USA and in the United Kingdom. Nevertheless, the contacts between the Habsburgs and the president can be described as very good. The circle around Otto and the Empress, consisting of members of the former government and the aristocracy, such as Count Richard von (portion of sentence illegible) Bruno Walter. The political agitation mounted in the US government’s declaration of July 25th, 1942 in which the illegality of the >>Anschlub<< was acknowledged and the restoration of the Austrian state made an official war aim. “This government has never taken the position that Austria was legally absorbed into the German Reich (24).” After that even the British government’s Foreign Secretary, Anthony Eden, declared that “His Majesty’s government does not have to accept the constitutional changes in Austria after March 1938 (25).” In other words, the positive US reaction to the Habsburg interventions produced a more friendly attitude of British government towards Otto’s cause. Strong support for the Habsburg came from influential Jewish circles in America. Many Jews were very favorably disposed to the Habsburgs due to the protection which the Jews had enjoyed during the times of the Empire. The FAM (Free Austria Movement) established a newspaper, the >>Voice of America<<, published by Martin Fuchs, Erik von Kuehnlt-Leddhin and many others. To summarize, the echo the Habsburgs received in America, was very positive indeed. They gained the President’s personal support, were assisted by many important groups and enjoyed the benevolence of large parts of the population. However, the Archduke’s plan to set up an >>Austrian Battalion<< following the same attempt which had been made in France two years earlier, failed. “On November 9th, 1942 the American Secretary of War, Henry L. Stimson, announced the formation of an >>Austrian Battalion<< within the US Armed Forces. However, the >>Independent Infantry Battalion No. 101<< only lasted a short time (26).” The Austrian military unit, although strongly supported by Roosevelt and General Sikorski, the leader of the Polish government-in-exile together with numerous other Socialists. The number of Austrians who agreed to join the battalion was not sufficient, either. Therefore the unit was abandoned and its members dismissed. In Canada, where Empress Zita and her sons got in touch with government officials, their efforts were crowned with considerable success, and the FAM as well as the Imperial Family were given the opportunity to continue their work against Hitler and for the Austrian rebirth. In Earl Athione, the general governor of Canada, the House of Austria found a powerful supporter. The Empress and Archduke Rudolph stayed in Canada for most of the war, but most of the monarchist agitation after 1941 took place in the United States which “…consequently became the centre of the monarchist activities in exile (27).” The Opponents of the Habsburgs and their reasons for the agitation – which were the omissions of the Imperial Family Besides their obvious enemies, which were the Nazis and their allies, the Family’s work was opposed by various other political groups. As I mentioned earlier, the Habsburgs did not win many friends among the Revolutionary Socialists or Otto Bauer which was a quite important group within the Austrian political scenery. They were in favor of the >>Anschlub<< idea – which the Imperial Family strictly opposed. Furthermore, their socialist attitude stood against the conservative of the Habsburgs. They actively worked against the Imperial Family throughout the whole war. The Communists were another group opposing the Imperial Family for ideological reasons. Although the principles of monarchism and communism strictly oppose each other, they worked together sometimes, as both camps – or at least certain representatives – realized that they were fighting the same enemy and therefore agreed to an ‘armistice’ for the time being. But nevertheless conflicts did arise as many aims of the supporter of all Communist resistance, the Soviet Union, differed greatly from the Legitimists intervention. Naturally the Stalin Regime worked actively against the Legitimist resistance. The alliance with Stalin after 1941 did also hamper the relations between the Western powers and the Habsburgs as Britain and the United States did not dare to challenge the pact with the Soviets. Many members of the republican resistance saw the danger of a restoration of monarchy in the support for Hapsburg. The Imperial Family had indeed never clarified for which ‘Austria’ and for ‘which Hungary’ they were campaigning. The borders which were drawn in 1918/1919 caused much disagreement, dispute and fury, especially in Austria and Hungary, as these countries had to hand over vas areas to the newly created states. The House of Habsburg did not accept these changes on Europe’s map, either, and, further more, wee naturally by no means opposing a shift towards monarchy, which, they thought, could happen through a plebiscite (28). However, the restoration was not the condition for their work (13). Nevertheless, the Habsburg’s omission to state clearly the definite areas which concerned them in their agitation within the Austrian and Hungarian resistance as well as the attempts to re-create a larger geo-political unity within the Danube area irritated not only many Austrian Resistance politicians. This leads directly to another group of fierce animosity towards Archduke Otto and his confidants: the nationalists from many of those states which succeeded the Austro-Hungarian Empire, most of all Edvard Bebes. The Socialist Benes saw the national sovereignty of Czechoslovakia severely endangered by the activities of the family of their former rulers. An attitude which is understandable from Benes’s point of view, being one of those who deposed the monarchy in Bohemia, Moravia and Slovakia and formed the Czech Republic. Another, quite different reservoir of rejection of the Habsburg engagement, as mentioned earlier in the essay, came from British and American officials for which three main reasons can be given. First of all, Western governments were concerned about possible – and indeed activated – resistance from the governments-in-exile of those occupied countries that had been parts of the old Danube Monarchy, another reason was (after 1941) the concern not to annoy the Soviets who naturally opposed the ‘reactionary’ Legitimist movement. Lastly, personal reasons should not be left out, either. Certain British and American politicians, among those Anthony Eden, showed feelings of hatred against the Habsburgs because of their Roman Catholic religion and out of historical enmity against the former opponent Austria-Hungary. According to Anthony Eden a separated Austria had always caused harassment in its political relations to Germany. Though that analysis of the work of the Hapsburg Family I have come to the conclusion that the claim that the Imperial Family only worked for the restoration of their former power as a necessity for their activities is evidently not true. On the other hand, I should not support the thesis that their work was ‘most significant and nobody else contribute so much’ (10) as it is almost impossible in history to pose such cardinal statements. However, I have gained the opinion that the Habsburgs were indeed important characters within the Austrian resistance movement against Hitler, and their work was certainly of great historical importance, as well as the work of other groups and thus contributed much to the outcome of the Moscow Declaration which declared Austria a victim of Nazi Germany’s aggression and therefore had to be freed. Footnotes 1)
Enc. Britannica, page 520 |
|
|
zutragen".26) however the Frenchmen the allied decisions to anticipate there did not want to still wait, muf3ten the Osterreicher. Only as the existence of osterreichischer battalions in Yugoslavia, lie8 France - already under de Gaulle - was become known its Zuruckhaltung falls to and gave in the middle of April 1945 the list of a osterreichischen militarischen unit bekannt.z ') as tie point of this battalion applied the city Riom in the section Puy de Dome. The instruction went by, a first Detachement of 200 freiwilligen and four") off izieren ehemoglichst in march to set. After the report of Hans's realm man the message was taken up by the list of osterreichischer units in the camp Suzzoni, with rough Freude°; all Lagerangeh6rigen announced itself without exception as freiwillige. Since the exact end of the war was not to be counted yet to foresee and on the list of further battalions, one gave for the time being the priority to the jungsten Jahrgangen. On 2 May 1945 the first battalion in AI sailed itself under Filhrung of realm man ..... greed an and came on 12 May into Riom to 29) it with 6sterreichischen freiwilligen from other camps into France on the effective-strong of 508 men erganzt and remained full four months there in training. As 1. Osterreichi battalionbattalion battalion, consisting of three Schiltzenkompanien and of a staff company, formed it a selbstandigen, organizational for the franzosischen army subordinated federation. This was set on 14 September 1945 in march, reached end of the monthly Innsbruck, where the Hochstkommandierende of the franz6sischen zone of occupation removed general Bethouart in bsterreich, on 10 October the Defilierung of the battalion before the yard castle. In the consequence the battalion, whose companies were befehligt by Osterreichern, provided the border service in Vorarlberg together with franzosischen units. But plotzlich and unexpectedly joined the inter+allied advice on 14 December 1945 the Auflosung of the federation much to the Enttauschung of the freiwilligen, who hoped, this battalion became once the core stick of the army of the free and selbstandigen bsterreich bilden.ó) the end of war prevented the list of further osterreichischer battalions. Remaining in the Camp the Suzzoni Zuruckgebliebenen, which likewise still on the employment in unitunit units had counted, to at the beginning of of 1946 in its North African camp and divided here as well as after their transfer after Sudfrankreich the fate of other Wehrmachtsangeh6riger than Kriegsgefangene.3 ') United States protecting it in Grof3britannien 1ê succeeded to uberzeugen politician of the necessity for its own osterreichischen combat force were located in the United States politician, everything in front the Prasident of the union, to their once gefaf3ten plan of the infantry battalion No. 101, which as the first step was meant toward acknowledgment of a osterreichischen government-in-exile and, as is shown, also by the opponents of this battalion one interpreted in such a way. Roosevelt was the author and within the American administration the most decided advocate of this osterreichischen troop. Fur it had this federation of approximately 900 men a purely symbolic character, like this also with ahnlichen Auslanderformationen (Greece, Norway, the Philippines) the case was; the militarische value stood fur for the Prasidenten, which had been satisfied already with a company, thus about 120 men, hardly to the Dgbatte. Roosevelt kept Osterreichi battalion in the question despite serious doubts from that was department and on the part of a parliamentary group from the State department around the Assistant Secretary OF State Adolf A. Berle Jr. the upper hand. Contrary to the latter the Secretary OF sat down was Henry L Stimson after some time of varying, also against the Unwillen of high Militars, fiir to the Truppenkorper occupied with Osterreichern in. Stimson was it also, that on 19 November 26) realm man, a.a.0., P. 77. 27) red woman red book. Representations, documents and of proofs to the prehistory and history of the Okkupation Osterreichs (after official Ouellen), Vienna 1946, P. 166 f. CPU) realm man, a.a.0., P. 78, speaks of fiinf officers. 29) realm man, a.a.0., P. 78 FF. 30) DOW 3833; DOW 337; Felix Kreissler, the Osterreicher and its nation. A Lernproze8 with obstacles, vienna Koln Graz 1984, P. 280. 3') Palisek, a.a.0., P. 210 f.
Hans's realm man, Angehdriger of the franzosischen army, with wife in Algiers, autumn 1944.
Ernst Haeusserman in the uniform of the American Streitkrafte. Company of the 1. Osterreichi Freiwiiligen battalion, Riom (France). rikanischer connecting with 6sterreichischen freiwilligen planned, which should have the same rights as soldier other federation. In the training stage the officers American Burger osterreichischer descent warden its, until then at present the employment Osterreicher themselves could take dTese positions. Enough-end if freiwillige should not to be found, one thought of the transfer iisterreichischerEmigranten from other units. The soldiers warden the oath on the United States carry out, American army uniforms carry possibly fur the American StaatsbOrgerschaft for and qualify. The battalion was not meant as combat and as an occupation troop. As planned, the training of the bsterreichischen battalion began on 15 December 1942 in the Camp Atterbury, Indiana. When became obvious, daf3 with freiwilligen alone the battalion do not aufzufullen were, American Staatsburger osterreichischer origin and 6ster reichische emigrants from other units in the Osterreichi battalion were shifted - official with agreement of the concerning, but in many traps also against their will. Few that altogether 588 soldiers (conditions center Marz 1943) were Angehorige of the succession states - among other things 30 Tschechoslowaken, 27 Poland, 21 Yugoslavs, 19 Hungary -, and according to report of the commander of battalion lieutenant colonel Vincent J. Conrad grassierten discontent and of resentment under the Nationalitaten. Soldiers regarded the battalion as Vehikelfur the reputting of the Habsburgerherrschaft in Europe ("I don't want ton fight for petrols. I want ton fight for America." fur petrol does not want to kampfen. I want fur America combat EN")"), befurchteten by the transfer a Verzogerung of their Ansuchens around the Staatsburgerschaft or was simply to have been verargert, from their fruheren militarischen federation have been pulled out. Due to thereupon breaking loose protest waiter the obligation transfer granted to Stimson in the Marz 1943 the jerk transfer all that one, insisted on on which in the main the Volontare Obrigblieben beginning of April 1943 was do material this 144 men. The intended battalion-strong from 931 soldiers to to reach, seemed with the available recruiting speed only in two and a half years verwirklichbar3 '), on which the boss of the general staff in the middle of suggested April 1943 picking up. Roosevelt gave its consent, to and at the beginning of of May 1943 were issued the order, the battalion as fast as moglich and without 6ffentliche Ankundigung to eliminieren35). Goldner registered serious errors and Fehleinschatzungen on sides of the administration as well as the recruiting committee, which were the focus of all attacks. Neither it, the American Offentlichkeit and the 6sterreichischen emigrant of a clear separation, here bsterreich battalion and there having castle aspirations succeeded to the American administration nor the representatives of the recruiting committee to uberzeugen. The?Free Austria Youth Committee ", which was close to Ferdinand Czernin, printed its Mif3 approval clearly out: "... incoming goods feel convinced that you acres struggling for the interests OF your family and emergency for the liberation OF Austria. ... You of acres disturbing the unity which incoming goods need badly into the struggle against in such a way the Axis powers." (?... we are uberzeugt, do not daft you fur the interest of your family argue and not fur release bsterreichs. ... They storen the unit, we the straight now in the war against the axle-made so urgently brauchen.")'6) it became hardly on positive and negative experiences with battalions of this kind already existing zuruckgegriffen; the Offentlichkeitsarbeit did not exist as well as, the Ankundigung waiter the list of the battalion and of a recruiting committee came so plotzlich, as if one wolite all uberrumpeln and before completed facts placed. Too strongly on Roosevelt one set, then daft one believed, without further Aufklarungs&beit do to konnen. Heavily weighing questions, how those that in the case of the capture of the battalion on geh6rigen by the third realm ge schehen warde - capture as Hochverrater - and as one secures oneself before it kñnte, not enough were considered. Just as little one took Rilcksicht on the desire of many 6ster of reichischer emigrants into the egg nigten states, which regarded the acquisition of the American Staatsburgerschaft fur more importantly, than the Wiederge winnung the Unabhangigkeit of the Heimatstaates".3 often not remained in best memory ') to Jugoslawien38) than filnf the bsterreichischen battalions were trained and/or one were used, were the power situation on the Balkans and also in the operational area in Slovenia already for the disadvantage of crew power decided. Already since the surrender of Italy in September 1943 and the area controlled before by Italy saw themselves forced to armed forces and police troops, grof3raumige Umfassungsmanover and operations in favor of punctual employment and of control of Stutzpunkten as well as of connecting lines zuruckzustellen; also at that time verstarkt the allied Unterstutzung at the same time began fur Tito. At the end of of 1944, as the training of the 1. Osterreichi battalion to the off schluB, was also the area came around Crnomelj and the Suha Krajina already Nebenschauplatz of the German Parti sanenbekampfung. In Crnomelj the main staff of the people release army and of the partisan department Sloweni was appropriate ens for and not far of it - in Tribuce - the A6sbildungslager of the 1. Bataillons. The periphery Crnomeljs formed its area of operations, insbesonde RH the protection from small mobile raiding parties of the crew closes and at the same time the safety device of the basis to the north, whereby the Krka between Zuzemberk and Novo Mesto uberschritten only rarely became. Two act existence are this Darstel (continuation on P. 534) 33) PM, 24. M5rz 1943. 34) Erhart, a.a.0., P. 432. 35) Erhart, P. 274, 433 to 436. 36) at open type character, 28 December 1942, Erhart, a.a.0., P. 429. 37) Goldner, a.a.0., P. 170. 38) Holzer, November I POJ, P. 411; ders., the 6ster of reichischen battalions in Yugoslavia 1944 to 1945. To the resistance strategy of the 6ster reichischen communist emigration, in: Contemporary history, 4. Jg., number 2, November 1976, P. 39-55; Red woman red book, P. 145 f. |
|
|
Page last revised
10/14/2008 James D. West www.IndianaMilitary.org |
