On 14 August 1941 the Reich Minister of the Interior informs the Head of the Reich Chancellery that there are no further objections to the visible identification of Jews in the Protectorate1NAP, ÚŘP, I-3b 5851, box 389, fols. 596 f. Published in Milotová and Kárný, Od Neuratha k Heydrichovi, doc. 31, pp. 346 f. This document has been translated from German.
Letter from the Reich Minister of the Interior2Dr Wilhelm Frick. (Ie 163 I-III/41/5012), Berlin, to the Reich Minister and Head of the Reich Chancellery,3Dr Hans Lammers. Berlin, dated 14 August 1941 (copy)4Forwarded to the Reich Protector of Bohemia and Moravia (received 24 August 1941). At the end of the document: ‘For your information I attach a copy to the telex L.S.D. L.A. Prague no. 1375, dated 16 July 1941, addressed to Reich Minister Dr Lammers. Signed on behalf of Dr Stuckart. Witnessed: [signature illegible] Ministerial Registry.’ The original contains handwritten annotations. The telex mentioned here from Karl Hermann Frank to Lammers, dated 16 July 1941, is published in Pätzold, Verfolgung, Vertreibung, Vernichtung, p. 294.
Re: visible identification in the Protectorate
Response to the letter of 18 July 1941 – Rk. 10 588 B –5This letter is not in the file.
With regard to introducing identifying markers for Jews, the Reich Marshal announced at a meeting of Gauleiter on 6 December 1938 that the Führer had decided against it, and he explained the reasons for this decision.6On 6 Dec. 1938 Göring explained that Hitler had objections to the visible identification. He was said to reject the idea partly because he did not want to jeopardize foreign relations. See Götz Aly and Susanne Heim, ‘Staatliche Ordnung und organische Lösung: Die Rede Hermann Görings “über die Judenfrage” vom 6. Dezember 1938’, Jahrbuch für Antisemitismusforschung, vol. 2 (1993), pp. 378–404. Following last year’s review of the matter, I refer you to my letter of 24 July 1940 – I 1401 VII/VIII/40g – 5012.7This letter is not in the file. Regarding the discussions on the visible identification of Jews in the Reich, see Introduction, pp. 63–64. The Führer’s decision related to the territory of the Reich as it was then constituted.
In the meantime, the political situation has completely changed. Now that the foreign policy situation is clear, it seems to me – subject to the position taken on this by the Foreign Office, which you have no doubt asked them to clarify – that we no longer need to consider the repercussions for our foreign policy. More to the point, conditions in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia are completely different from those in the Old Reich. I also think it not without significance that in the General Government, as well as in small areas of the annexed Eastern territories, Jews have been required to wear identifying markers since the conclusion of the Polish campaign.8Regulation on the Visible Identification of Jews and Jewesses in the General Government, 23 Nov. 1939, Verordnungsblatt Generalgouvernement, 1939, no. 8, 30 Nov. 1939, p. 61: see also PMJ 4/49.
I therefore have no objections to the visible identification of Jews in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, but I think we need to find out first whether this is likely to result in an increased drain of Jewish manpower from enterprises in the Protectorate which cannot be compensated for by other workers in view of the acute labour shortage.9The ruling applicable to the entire German Reich, including the Protectorate, pre-empted any separate ruling for the Protectorate. See Doc. 212.