DR. SIEMERS: Yes; or Raeder.
SCHULTE-MÖNTING: Not before the next morning.
DR. SIEMERS: That would be 7 December.
SCHULTE-MÖNTING: At the earliest. In this case, the Chief of Staff of the Naval Operations Staff would decide whether for operational reasons that telegram should be presented at once, or not.
DR. SIEMERS: Admiral, do you remember that document?
SCHULTE-MÖNTING: Yes.
DR. SIEMERS: Is Pearl Harbor mentioned in the document?
SCHULTE-MÖNTING: No. I tried to explain that Pearl Harbor had no connection with that telegram from Admiral Wennecker at all and that Wennecker depended on sources of information and on his assumptions or formulated his assumptions in a telegram on the basis of his information without having any definite facts. Such telegrams were received continuously. Sometimes these assumptions were correct; sometimes they were incorrect.
DR. SIEMERS: Admiral, the Prosecution has submitted it to prove that military negotiations had taken place with Japan. Am I correct in saying that that was only a message concerning possible developments?
SCHULTE-MÖNTING: Yes, of course. I have tried before to explain that there were no military negotiations between the admiralty staffs. Rather the naval attaché was charged with examining and transmitting all information of value which came to him.