IBM and the Holocaust (35 page)

The world had changed dramatically since 1937. Germany was a prominent participant of the Watson-dominated ICC Congress. Diplomatic relations with the Reich had been sorely strained since
Kristallnacht
and the various invasions. War was around the corner. Washington did not want to act as though it was business as usual for Nazi Germany in international par-leys. Unsure White House staffers shunted the letter to Secretary of State Cordell Hull, asking him to prepare Roosevelt's comment "if you approve the sending of such a message."
²⁵

In Copenhagen, at the ICC Congress, Watson's pro-Axis proposal exceeded anything the State Department could have expected. He championed a resolution whereby private businessmen from the three Axis and three Allied nations would actually supercede their governments and negotiate a radical new international trade policy designed to satisfy Axis demands for raw materials coveted from other nations. The businessmen would then lobby their respective governments' official economic advisors to adopt their appeasement proposals for the sake of averting war. Ironically, the raw materials were needed by Axis powers solely for the sake of waging war.
²⁶

On June 28, under Watson's leadership, the ICC passed a resolution again calling for "a fair distribution of raw materials, food stuffs and other products . . . [to] render unnecessary the movements of armies across frontiers." To this end, the ICC asked "the governments of France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States . . . each collaborate with their own leading businessmen . . . with respect to national needs . . . [and therefore] give all countries of the world a fair opportunity to share in the resources of the world."
²⁷

Even as Watson angled for Germany to be ceded more raw materials, Germany was openly raping invaded territories. Just days before, on June 2, the
New York Times
carried a prominent story headlined "Terrors of Nazis Related by Benes," based on an international radio broadcast pleading for anti-Nazi resistance. In the article, purged Czechoslovakian President Eduard Benes detailed the Reich's methodical theft of Czech resources since the March 15, 1939, invasion. "Dr. Benes told of a nation of 10 million persons," the
New York Times
related, "until a few months ago proud and free, being systematically enslaved, degraded and robbed of its material and cultural possessions." The article indicated that Germany "has robbed and transported to Germany more than 35 billion crowns . . . [$1.22 billion] of Czecho-Slovak property."
²⁸

Benes declared, "You all must have heard how the German dictatorship is devastating the beauty that was Czecho-Slovakia, how splendid forests are being destroyed and the lumber carted away to Germany, how public buildings . . . are being divested of their window frames, of their glass windows, of all materials . . . all supplies have been taken and transported to Germany. . . . Factories are being ruined and industry crippled as machinery is carried away for war purposes."
²⁹

He added, "Czech families spend nights in the woods, not daring to sleep in their own beds for fear of Nazi pogroms. And German peasants, excited by the Nazis who have come from Germany for that purpose, bran-dish scythes and cry, 'The bloody night is coming.' "
³⁰

No wonder the German delegate to the ICC enthusiastically lauded Watson's proposal, which only sought to legitimize by private consultation what the Third Reich was undertaking by force. In his final speech of the Congress, Watson himself summed up the misery and devastation in the world as a mere "difference of opinion." His solution of businessmen conferring to divvy up other nations' resources to avoid further aggression was offered with these words: "We regret that there are unsatisfactory economic and political conditions in the world today, with a great difference of opinion existing among many countries. But differences of opinion, freely discussed and fairly disposed of, result in mutual benefit and increased happiness to all concerned."
³¹

But so enthusiastic was Watson that he quickly wrote to President Roosevelt, attaching transcripts from the conference and explaining that the concept of a private survey by businessmen to resolve and rewrite trade barriers was his invention. "You will note that this resolution does not suggest a political conference," Watson pointed out to the President, stressing the non-governmental procedure. But, he added, once the private recommendations were tendered, the six nations might then call for an international meeting to ratify the suggestions. Watson concluded his letter indicating that he had a "great deal of background" on the topic "which I prefer to present to you in person." He added a tantalizing triviality: "I also have a very interesting personal message to deliver to you from [the Danish monarch] His Majesty, King Christian X."
³²

Watson's embarrassing correspondence asking to brief Roosevelt began bouncing around the State Department, Division of European Affairs, Advisor on Political Relations, Division of Trade Agreements, Department of Protocol, Division of International Conferences, Office of the Advisor on International Economic Affairs, and Cordell Hull personally. One protocol chief wrote, "it is not a matter for us . . . Mr. Watson being an American, we would have nothing to do with making an appointment for him to see the President." Another offered a hairsplitting technicality: Watson was the outgoing president of the ICC. His July 5 letter to Roosevelt was written a few days after being succeeded at the ICC. Therefore, "It does not appear that it is necessary to comment . . . inasmuch as Mr. Watson is no longer President of the International Chamber and the resolution does not come to us officially from that body."
³³

Finally, an innocuous three-sentence say-nothing reply was cobbled together for the President's review after being initialed by no fewer than ten Department officials. It read: "My Dear Mr. Watson: I have received and read with interest your letter of July 5, 1939, in regard to the meeting of the Tenth Congress of the International Chamber of Commerce. I note that you desire to discuss some of the background of this meeting with me in person and to deliver to me a personal message from His Majesty King Christian X. I shall look forward to seeing you after you return to this country."
³⁴

In explaining so unresponsive a reply to Watson's elaborate letter, a key State Department official, John Hickerson, caustically wrote, "It seems to me that the attached draft letter for the President to Mr. Watson says about as much as the President could appropriately say. I do not see how the President could well comment on the resolution discussed in this letter re commending that the Governments of France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States appoint economic representatives of their respective governments to work with businessmen in regard to 'their own needs and what they are able to contribute to the needs of other countries.' "
³⁵

Watson sent Hull a letter almost identical to the one he sent to Roosevelt. The same State Department group that formulated Roosevelt's response proffered a similar reply for the Secretary of State, amounting to little more than a simple and non-committal thanks to Watson for "your letter regarding the activities of the Congress."
³⁶

But Watson would not desist. He sent formal lithographed resolutions to the State Department hoping to rally its support for an international conference of business executives to parcel out the world's resources. One State Department assistant secretary could not help but comment on the similarity of Watson's suggestion to the Axis' own warlike demands. "This is, of course, a political question of major world importance," wrote the assistant secretary, "and one upon which we have been hearing much from Germany, Italy and Japan. It occurs to me that it is most unfortunate that Mr. Thomas J. Watson, as an American serving as the president of the International Chamber of Commerce, should have sponsored a resolution of this character. It may well be that this resolution will return to plague us at some future date." That comment was written on October 5, 1939.
³⁷
By then it was unnecessary to reply further.

Poland had already been invaded. World War II had begun.

HOURS BEFORE
dawn on September 1, 1939, SS Officer Alfred Naujocks was preparing to launch World War II. For days, Naujocks' detachment of German soldiers had been waiting. Sometime before 5:40 a.m., he received the code word from Berlin. Working methodically and according to plan, Naujocks' men donned Polish uniforms and staged a fake attack against a German radio station. Drugged concentration camp inmates were dragged into position and smeared with blood to become the "German casualties." This sham provided Hitler with the pretext to launch Operation Case White—the invasion of Poland.
³⁸

Germany's assault was the fiercest and fastest in history. Hundreds of airplanes mounted a sustained bombardment of Poland's railroads, storage facilities, troop encampments, and cities. Six divisions of coordinated troops, tanks, and artillery ravished Warsaw. Within days, the
New York Times
and other newspapers reported that three-fourths of much of the fire bombed and shell-battered capital was reduced to smoking rubble. So unique was this attack, it was dubbed
Blitzkrieg,
or lightning war. Britain and France declared war just days later.
³⁹

Poland, essentially unarmored and in many cases deploying horse cavalry, held out for twenty-seven fierce days before its complete capitulation. News of barbarous massacres, rapes, inflicted starvation, systematic deportations, and the resulting unchecked epidemics made headlines around the world. In one incident in Nasielek, some 1,600 Jews were whipped all night in what was termed a "whipping orgy." Two Jewish sisters were dragged from their beds in the night and taken to a cemetery; one was raped and the other given five zlotys and told to wait until next time. Shortly after the war began, a
New York Times
article headlined "250,000 Jews listed As Dead in Poland."
⁴⁰

Polish Jewry numbered more than 3 million persons—10 percent of the Polish population. Atrocities, rapes, and massacres could not wipe them all away. Deportation to labor camps was underway. But something more drastic was needed. A German military review of specific actions in Poland declared, "It is a mistake to massacre some 10,000 Jews and Poles, as is being done at present . . . this will not eradicate the idea of a Polish state, nor will the Jews be exterminated."
⁴¹

On September 13, the
New York Times
reported the Reich's dilemma with a headline declaring, "Nazis Hint Purge of Jews in Poland," with a subhead, "3,000,000 Population Involved." The article quoted the German government as declaring it wanted "removal of the Polish Jewish population from the European domain." The
New York Times
then added, "How . . . the 'removal' of Jews from Poland [can be achieved] without their extermination . . . is not explained."
⁴²

S
EPTEMBER 9, 1939
Mr. Thomas J. Watson, President
International Business Machines Corporation
590 Madison Ave.
New York NY USA

Dear Mr. Watson:

During your last visit in Berlin at the beginning of July, you made the kind offer to me that you might be willing to furnish the German company machines from Endicott in order to shorten our long delivery terms. I . . . asked you to leave with us for study purposes one alphabetic tabulating machine and a collator out of the American machines at present in Germany. You have complied with this request, for which I thank you very much, and have added that in cases of urgent need, I may make use of other American machines. . . .

You will understand that under today's conditions, a certain need has arisen for such machines, which we do not build as yet in Ger many. Therefore, I should like to make use of your kind offer and ask you to leave with the German company for the time being the alphabetic tabulating machines which are at present still in the former Austria. . . .

Regarding the payment, I cannot make any concrete proposals at the moment, however, I should ask you to be convinced that I shall see to it that a fair reimbursement for the machines left with us will be made when there will be a possibility. . . .

. . . [A]t the time that the German production of these machines renders it possible, we shall place at your disposal . . . a German machine for each American machine left with us.