by Edwin Black
Fifteen Polish women were employed just to punch the cards and load the sorters. Three German nationals supervised the railway office, undertaking the final tabulations and summary statistics in great secrecy. Handfuls of printouts were reduced to a small envelope of summary data, which was then delivered to a secret destination. Truckloads of the preliminary printouts, which created the secret summaries, were then regularly burned, along with the spent cards, Krzemieniecki recalls.
As a forced laborer, Krzemieniecki was compelled to work as a “sorter and tabulator” ten hours per day for two years. He never realized in any way that his work involved the transporation of Jews to gas chambers. “I only know that this very modern equipment made possible the control of all the railway traffic in the General Government,” he told the newspaper. Only after IBM and the Holocaust was released did he begin to recall the significance of his work.29
In 1944, as the Russians advanced, his group loaded the machines onto trucks, which moved the equipment to Dresden. “I think they vanished without a trace,” he added.30
Krzemieniecki’s relatively small group punched in only a limited amount of information on the ten-column cards, mainly the number of the train, whether it was a cargo train, whether express or regular, and the distance traveled. For example, a cargo designation was coded 8. Five-digit kilometer records were punched in as well. No alphabetical machines were used, hence all codes had to be memorized. An “outside technician,” who spoke German and Polish and did not work for the railroad, was almost constantly on site to keep the machines running. The technician generally undertook major maintenance on the machines approximately once each month.31
The Pawia Street operation undoubtedly interfaced with a much larger and robust Hollerith operation at the Group IV Transportation Office elsewhere in Krakow. This office continuously tabulated details about the length of train lines, number and availability of locomotives and freight cars, as well as the amount and type of cargo, and “the number of persons transported.”32
Railway management was among IBM’s most diverse and highly developed applications. Typically, destinations were specifically preprinted on the IBM cards in order to locate and route boxcars and engines. Accounting cards organized and itemized the freight billing. Locomotive efficiency studies constantly sought to maximize fuel use and typically tabulated the exact amount of coal used to haul specific types of freight in the boxcars. The tailored railroad management programs, the custom-designed punch cards printed at IBM’s Rymarska Street print shop across from the Warsaw Ghetto, and the leased machines utilized by railways in Poland were not under the German subsidiary, but the New York-controlled subsidiary in Warsaw, Watson Buromaschinen GmbH.
“I knew they were not German machines,” recalled Krzemieniecki in the newspaper interview, and in our later discussion. “The labels were in English…. The person maintaining and repairing the machines spread the diagrams out sometimes. The language of the diagrams of those machines was only in English.”33
I asked Krzemieniecki if the machine logos were in German, Polish, or English. He answered “English. It said ‘Business Machines,’” I asked, “Do you mean ‘International Business Machines’?” Krzemieniecki replied, “No, ‘Watson Business Machines.’”34 That was the correct answer. In Poland, IBM NY’s new subsidiary operated under the German legal name: Watson Buromaschinen. But the Polish machines proudly bore logo tags with the subsidiary’s name in English: Watson Business Machines.
Among the most dramatic post-book revelations was the discovery of the massive Hollerith statistical center in Krakow known as the Hollerith Gruppe, staffed by more than 500 punching and tabulating employees and dozens of machines. Research discovered a previously unknown Berlin agency called the Central Office for Foreign Statistics and Foreign Country Research, which continuously received detailed data from the Statistics Office of the State Secretariat in Krakow. Nazi Hollerith expert Richard Muller headed the operation in Krakow.35 Discoveries about this office answered questions about where much of the data for all of Poland was processed.
A variety of Hollerith-equipped Nazi offices had been operating across occupied Poland from the day of invasion on September 1, 1939. America was not in the war; Watson had not yet returned his medal; and hence he maintained his complete commercial support for the Hitler regime throughout the initial rape of Poland. As part of this strategic commercial support, IBM NY agreed to a vital installation of machines so massive it was not called a Hollerith Department, but a Hollerith Gruppe. This vital installation would permit the Nazis to organize the systematic looting and subjugation of Poland, as well as implement other plans for its citizens.
Just after invasion, Hitler’s General Government in Warsaw asked its Regional Planning Department to establish a Central Statistics Office at the shuttered Jagiellonian University in Krakow. By April 1940, the Nazis formed a working group comprised of a single German statistics expert assisted by former employees of the Polish Statistical Service and other Polish civil servants. This group sifted through some 60,000 printed volumes of raw information in the Polish Statistical Service library in Warsaw, preparatory to conversion to Hollerith data. The selected information, along with all previously supplied Hollerith machines and staff, were relocated from Warsaw to the new Nazi agency in Krakow. So large was the enterprise, the library of raw intelligence to be punched filled two halls.36
By September 1940, the Reich issued a Decree for Statistics in Poland, creating the new expanded “Statistics Office.” Within a few months, the Krakow Statistics Office at 24 Nurnerstrasse subsumed most other statistical operations in Poland. By late 1941, the Statistics Office employed 420 persons including 16 Germans in 6 distinct groups—Group I: Administration; Group II: Population and Culture; Group III: Food and Agriculture; Group IV: Economic Trade and Transportation; Group V: Social Statistics; and Group VI: Finance and Tax. A November 30, 1941, Statistics Office report explains, “The Hollerith Gruppe area of operation stretches across all subject areas,” adding that a major expansion plan would see staffing rise to 500 persons within a month.37
The expansion was dependent on more leased machines, spare parts, company technicians, and a continued, guaranteed supply of millions of additional IBM cards. Because backlogged orders for Hollerith machines required a year or more to deliver, IBM’s long-term supply commitment almost certainly dated to the first days of World War II. Indeed, the Statistics Office report was written just weeks after IBM’s European general manager Werner Lier visited Berlin to oversee IBM NY’s deployment of machines in Poland and other countries. The Krakow Statistics Office’s November 30, 1941 report assured Berlin, “the installation of the equipment necessary for the work of the Hollerith Gruppe has commenced. It is estimated that the equipment will be ready for use by the end of the year, and that training of the prospective employees can begin. The employee designated as the leader of this group now participates in a seminar in Berlin to train for this subject area…. Survey material is already in preparation.”38
The Statistics Office also assured Berlin that its Hollerith Gruppe would employ equipment more modern than the old IBM machinery found in most pre-war Polish data agencies, thus allowing the Nazi office to launch a plethora of “large-scale censuses.” Everything would be counted—and often. Large scale “agricultural” and “industrial” censuses had already been undertaken earlier in 1941. A new “residential census” was also planned. “But the most important and complex census, the population and occupational census, has been in preparation since the beginning of the year,” the report specified.39
In addition to special censuses, the report enumerated a long list of “continuous statistical surveys,” including those for population and culture, domestic migration, infectious disease, and cause of death. Moreover, regular food and agriculture surveys were “coupled with summary surveys of the population and ethnic groups.”40 Tabulating food supplies against ethnic numbers allowed the Nazis to ration caloric intake
as they subjected the Jewish community to progressive starvation.
The Statistics Office’s November 30, 1941 report concludes with the statement “Our work is just beginning to bear fruit.”41
Much more information has come to light on IBM in other countries, and will be incorporated into future editions.
Despite a highly publicized, months-long public search throughout the world, in which many stepped forward to offer new materials, not a single document was uncovered anywhere in any country indicating that IBM, either in New York or Europe, ever moderated its strategic alliance with the Third Reich. Nor did IBM, in the face of continuous media requests after this book’s release, offer any documents or evidence to explain its conduct. Instead, the company issued an official statement: “IBM does not have much information about this period,” and declined to comment.
REVELATION AND RESPONSIBILITY
The Publication of the Hardcover Edition of IBM AND THE HOLOCAUST
ON FEBRUARY 12, 2001, IBM AND THE HOLOCAUST WAS simultaneously released in nine languages and distributed in forty countries. Nine of the world’s most prestigious publishers worked arduously, time zone by time zone, to ensure that the embargoed news broke worldwide at approximately the same hour. Doing so meant foregoing the customary months of advance catalogue sales and store placement. But announcing the findings correctly and responsibly was the number-one priority. Our collective hope was to make certain that the explosive story did not leak in sensationalist or exaggerated snippets, but was disclosed in a complete historical context.
Equally important, I personally feared that vital documents yet to be reviewed might be further obstructed, or might even disappear.
When the news finally broke, the result was a profound Holocaust revelation that shook countries and institutions, as well as scholars and other individuals. In many ways they are still shaking. So am I. Here is the story behind that upheaval.
Much has been written about the book’s secrecy. Indeed, the book was not made public until February 12, 2001. But more than a thousand people in numerous countries were involved in its creation. There was no other way to achieve the level of precision and review required for such a project, and to ensure the book’s message would not be exaggerated or misconstrued.
I began sharing information with others two years before publication. About a hundred researchers, historians, and volunteers searched the files of some fifty archives and research libraries in seven countries. Throughout the actual writing in 2000, some thirty-five world-class Holocaust historians and other experts reviewed my work, chapter by chapter, as the text rolled off the word processor. Actually, I had invited nearly double that number of reviewers. No scholar was off limits, but there was a condition: Each reviewer had to agree to read every page in order, no skipping around. Hence, this would be no quick weekend skim, but a protracted, line-by-line effort. For example, noted historian Gerhard Hirschfeld, president of the International Committee for the History of the Second World War, took six months to finish his methodical review. In this way, each scholar would absorb the complete story in context, regardless of specialty. We refused to rush anyone. Not all I contacted had the ability or inclination to invest so much time. But several dozen did (see the Acknowledgments). Scores of marginal notations were made, and many consultations ensued. Virtually all suggestions and corrections were adopted. Then the revised text was resubmitted over and over again until approved by each reviewer. Thus, IBM and the Holocaust became an extraordinary collaborative effort of international Holocaust and technology expertise.
My finished manuscript went to some of the finest editors and translators in the book world, located on three continents, nearly all boasting a thick portfolio of Holocaust publishing credentials. The publishers then commenced their own painstaking reviews, positing numerous questions and requests for written clarifications. Original French, German, or Dutch documents were shipped to each foreign publisher for independent translation and verification. Most publishers requested that their own local Holocaust specialists read the text as well. Because IBM and the Holocaust was a global release, it was imperative that my manuscript be bulletproof not only in America, but also in the academic corridors of England, Germany, France, Holland, Italy, Brazil, Argentina, Poland, and the several dozen other countries in which it appeared. This imposed a welcome duty to harmonize with local experts on the most subtle points. For example, Auschwitz historian Franciszek Piper, who meticulously read every page, requested numerous minute changes from a strictly Polish perspective; among them was that we not refer to concentration camps in Poland, but rather occupied Poland. We adopted all his corrections in as many editions as possible.
Then came the lawyers. My manuscript needed to pass the scrutiny of attorneys throughout the Americas and Europe, each applying the most conservative standards prevalent in his country. In some nations, such as England, known for its tough publishing laws, the test was more than rigorous. Factual backup—often sentence by sentence—was sought on point after point. It was provided, and all were satisfied. In one case, I carted sixteen boxes of documentation into a lawyer’s conference room for a two-day hairsplitting challenge. I welcomed all such challenges. My files are arranged so that any sentence in the text can be completely documented at the thirty-second pull of a folder. Defensive documentation has always been my rule.
Finally, the world’s major media was invited to launch its own independent pre-publication review. The most respected networks, newspapers, and magazines in the world assigned their most senior historical journalists known for Holocaust coverage and expertise. For weeks before publication, and in some cases months, a caravan of hardened and skeptical print and broadcast journalists trekked to my basement outside Washington, D.C., poring over my files, examining and filming documents, interviewing experts, and questioning me. Concomitantly, many launched their own investigations in Europe, carefully scouring local archives and questioning experts to independently verify my information.
The long roster of distinguished media included Der Spiegel and Stern in Germany; the Sunday Times in England; L’Express and Le Monde in France; Newsweek, The Washington Post, and Reform Judaism in the United States; Algemeen Dagblad in Holland; and many more. The media group also included major TV networks in Germany, France, Poland, Holland, the United States, and numerous other countries. Each network dispatched its most accomplished historical journalists with acknowledged Holocaust expertise.
Der Spiegel independently discovered the Abteilung Hollerith in Stutt hof. Algemeen Dagblad, in Amsterdam, flew in its senior Auschwitz expert, Theo Gerritse. ZDF-TV in Germany dispatched Ralf Piechowiak, noted for work on other respected Holocaust documentaries. NBC in America spent almost a year before publication flying film crews and researchers to concentration camps, archives, and eyewitnesses to meticulously verify the book, deploying knowledgeable producers who had previously investigated Chase Manhattan Bank’s connection to the Third Reich.
While the media was reviewing the manuscript and files, numerous Jewish leaders in America and Europe were sent copies as well. Under no circumstances would I launch a book of this nature without briefing the Jewish and Holocaust survivor leadership. Many of these leaders cope with complex Holocaust issues every day; they are among the best informed on the topic, and offer an indispensable perspective. For example, David Saperstein, director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, displayed an uncanny eye for detail and contributed a number of precious pre-publication suggestions.
By February 2001, hundreds of copies of the original and revised manuscripts were circulating, and as many as a thousand people on three continents had access to the information. Archivists and scholars throughout the world were anxiously anticipating the release. Scores of journalists and their research staffs in a dozen countries were filming, inquiring, and interviewing. Throughout it all, the publishers, my agent, and I were determined to release the information in as responsible a fashion as possible.
Each publisher contractually agreed to avoid any insensitive or sensationalist marketing, and we extracted similar pledges from as many of the other media as possible. I even listed four terms that my publishers were forbidden to use: exclusive, secret, unknown, and first-time.
Historical context, proper explanations, and a non-sensationalist approach continued to guide our every move. Jewish leaders scheduled several historical presentations to answer community questions immediately after publication. The most important one would be held just days after the book’s release at Temple Beth Ami outside Washington, D.C. It was sponsored by the Anti-Defamation League, the Braun Holocaust Center, the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, and a consortium of other organizations and synagogues. I would speak, and openly show documents for anyone to examine. Academic presentations would also be offered by two of the world’s leading scholars on the period and topic: Robert Wolfe, retired chief of captured German documents for the National Archives and arguably the world’s leading expert on Nazi documentation, and William Seltzer, the foremost expert on the use of population statistics and Hollerith technology to persecute minorities during the Holocaust. Hundreds of people were invited in advance to a Holocaust presentation days before the book’s publication, and none of them knew the specifics. C-SPAN would broadcast the session.
A website was constructed at www.edwinblack.com to offer sample excerpts and other historian and leadership commentary. A single sedate and carefully worded press release was readied by the publishers worldwide. More than two dozen scholars and Jewish leaders had unanimously written public letters of endorsement to be released simultaneously.