Архив Војводине / Archives of Vojvodina

No. 43

FIELD COMMAND 816 REPORT TO SS MAJOR WEINMANN FOR JANUARY 1942, ON THE SITUATION IN PODRINJE AND THE EXPECTATION OF A MASS TRANSFER OF SERB REFUGEES FROM EASTERN BOSNIA AFTER THE WITHDRAWAL OF GERMAN FORCES.[1]

REPORT ON THE SITUATION

for the period from 25. XII. 41 to 25. I. 1942.

Dr. Weinmann[2]

Field Command (V) 816

Subject: General, Political Situation

Case handler: OKVR. Dr. Dittrich/A. [3]

The normalization of all life circumstances continues. The population is also making the effort to cooperate in this. Efforts to end the previous circumstances as soon as possible are visible, but the destruction and economic damage are so great that it will take a long time and special measures will be needed to achieve this goal.

The issue of mood is aggravated by the circumstances to which the Serb families living in Bosnia are exposed. According to the information of the 342nd Division,[4] these families are afraid that after the withdrawal of German troops from Bosnia, they will be slaughtered by the Ustashas and flee in the direction of the Drina river, in order to find refuge in the area of old Serbia.[5] The Serbian authorities have already addressed the Field Command with the desire to take over the protection of these Serb families in any way. The Chetniks[6] stationed in Loznica expressed their readiness to engage on the other side of the Drina river in the protection of these Serb families. However, in order to prevent cross-border incidents of any kind, the Chetniks were removed 5 km from the border. Within this 5 km zone, service is performed only by German customs officers and Serbian financial control – the latter are unarmed.

Given that Serbian units are willing to provide assistance to Serb families fleeing Bosnia, the transfer of refugees – the Division estimates that they count 8,000 – will not be preventable by the Serbian forces after the withdrawal of German troops. Therefore, it is appealed that sufficient protection of the border on the Drina river be taken into account when determining the garrison of some newly arrived troops. In addition to the destruction of the settlements in Mačva and the already very tense situation in terms of supply, it would be impossible for larger masses of refugees to settle in the local area or to feed from that land.

The issue of harvesting on some islands on the Drina river, which according to the Croatian understanding are located on the territory of the Croatian state, was negotiated by the war administration adviser Rieger with the District Chief in Bijeljina. During this, it was agreed – a written statement there on has not arrived – that the Croats at the border would hand over the products from the harvest they had taken from these islands to the Serb owners. The latter was supposed to happen under the protection of German customs officers. So far, nothing has been learned about any surrender of these foodstuffs. According to the order of the Croatian Ministry of Defense, any border crossing is prohibited in the future; border passes for the Drina crossing will no longer be issued, and the already issued passes will be revoked. When this regulation is implemented, the loss of the harvest should be taken into account for the next year as well, and this amounts to 1,000 tons of corn.

A special report is being submitted on the Russian units engaged as Industrial Protection[7] in the Krupanj District.

[1] АВ, Ф. 562, 3.1.1.2, 106.

[2] Handwritten note.

[3] Dr. Dittrich held the title of Senior War Administrative Adviser (Oberkriegsver­waltungsrat, abbreviated: OKVR) and served in the FK 816.

[4] 342nd Infantry Division. After the end of operations against the Partisans and Chetniks in western Serbia, this division continued operations against insurgents in eastern Bosnia in January 1942; see: Z. Antonić, Ustanak u istočnoj i centralnoj Bosni, 521-526.

[5] German name for the German occupation area in Serbia.

[6] Legal Chetnik units in Serbia.

[7]Werkschutz.

This – English – edition of the book is a translation of the one in the Serbian language, published in 2022 under the title Ustaška zverstva: Zbornik dokumenata (1941–1942). As far as the corpus of the Dossier from the personal fonds of Slavko Odić is concerned – and it makes the essential body of this book – the translation team worked from its Serbian version given in the said book and not from the German original.

The Serbian edition, with the documents translated from German, was printed in the Cyrillic alphabet, which necessitated some explanations provided by the Editor, Dr. Milan Koljanin, with regard to the linguistic traits, orthography and punctuation resorted to by the translators from German into Serbian (Tatjana Janićijević, Akademija Oxford) and the Editor. Naturally enough, numerous clarifications referring to the Serbian edition do not apply on the English one in most of the aspects of translation work. Hence the need to write this Note.

To begin with, the translators basically opted for the varieties of the American English rather than British English.

Personal names in the officially processed documents are most often written in what is today considered inverse order: family name/surname first, followed by one’s first/Christian name, without a comma in between.

Originally, the documents (letters, reports, statements etc.) were written (typed) in bureaucratic style and with a page layout practised by German offices, so these traits have been retained herein, and so have the obvious spelling and/or typing errors (personal names, toponyms); the latter have been corrected in the footnotes. The parts of text/sentences which are underlined or written with spaces between letters as means of emphasis correspond to the German original and its Serbian/Croat counterpart. The same applies to whole words or lines written in capital letters.

Punctuation has been kept almost completely, except when the meaning demanded comma (usually related to the rules of word order in an English sentence). Some marks, such as hyphens, dashes or slashes may impress the Reader as outdated or misplaced. Earlier typewriters did not have buttons with parentheses, and the slash was used instead of them.

Dates are written with differing uses or omissions of period (full stop), whereby month is written in three ways: fully in letters (20 January), in Arabic numerals (e.g. 20.1.) or Roman numerals (e.g. 20.I.). In rare cases, the slash can be found in dates (e.g. 12./X. 1941), but not as a regular separator between their constituents. Years are occasionaly written without the first digit, e.g. 942 instead of 1942, which is a frequent occurrence in oral communication.

Abbreviations, other than official identification means for offices, titles or codenames (VB, MA, RSHA etc.), have been translated (e.g. ’etc.’). The translators chose to retain the Croat/Serbian abbreviation for the name of the wartime ’state’, that is, ’NDH’ is standing for Nezavisna Država Hrvatska (Independent State of Croatia) instead of the less known English name (ISC). Some words were written in a shortened form for the reason of economy of expression, and the habit has been transferred to the translation, including the Editor’s intervention in the Serbian edition: Reg.[ister], Gend.[armerie], Gor[nja] Tuzla.

Footnotes in the English edition partially differ from those in the Serbian version. Some proved to be unnecessary (those that provided original names which were transliterated into the phonetical Cyrillic alphabet). New footnotes have been added by the Subeditor in order to explain/clarify the specific, locally used, words or phrases with which the Reader may not be familiar (such as slava, din, sokolski dom), or to indicate some nuances in the meaning (student, profesor). Here and there, the Reader will find notes in brackets inserted into the main body of the text by translators or the Editor where immediate understanding was needed.

Finally, it is noteworthy that the above-mentioned bureaucratic style of the presented documents mirrors the established conventions of communication in Central Europe and the Balkans of the first half of the 20th century, particularly in state and military affairs, yet also illustrates the specific ’hierarchy’ of various authorities on the occupied territories during World War Two, accentuating the relations between the German organs/institutions in power and the various offices subordinated to the administrative and military system of the Third Reich. As to the information, facts and accounts of events recorded in these documents, they are the subject of the history science and studies related thereto.

A. Č. P.