Page - 950 - in THE FIRST WORLD WAR - and the End of the Habsburg Monarchy, 1914 – 1918

950 An Empire Resigns pathian offensive and was very evidently meant to combat the commencing desertion. The summary courts-martial had to convene quickly, if possible see through the hearing in one sitting and achieve unanimity for a guilty verdict. If any of these factors was not accomplished, due legal process had to be initiated. The commander of a summary court-martial had the right to grant clemency, though only if it had been allowed him by the Emperor. Otherwise, the death penalty had to be carried out within two hours of the proclamation of the sentence. The maximum penalty for desertion was comparable to the extent that it had also been applied in similar cases in other armies. As it then turned out, however, Austria was far quicker to resort to execution than the German Army, where there were only 18 shootings for desertion, and also exceeded the British Army, where 269 death sen- tences for desertion were actually carried out. In France, Italy and Russia, on the other hand, deserters (or those who were regarded as such) were punished far more frequently. In Austria-Hungary, 345 soldiers were summarily convicted for desertion during the course of the war.2288 Until August 1917, the commanders from division upwards were empowered to pass death sentences in summary proceedings. On 10 August 1917, Emperor Karl instructed all death sentences to be submitted to him for his approval. If such approval was not issued, due legal process had to be instigated. After that, the number of sum- mary proceedings decreased further. But a different attitude was also prevalent and made reference to the question, which could never really be answered, as to whether desertion was to be equated with cowardice. In 1917, only twelve members of the military were convicted for proven cowardice. One military judge attributed this to cowardice being regarded as unmanly and soldiers therefore not wanting to open themselves up to such an accusation. With this assump- tion, however, he was unable to explain why during the course of the war there were, after all, around a million cases of members of the Imperial and Royal Army surrender- ing or deserting. Was the Imperial and Royal Army ‘unmanly’ ? In those cases, however, where soldiers had been temporarily absent without leave though had not deserted, only the offence of unauthorised absence was alleged and accordingly generally mild judge- ments and punishments were delivered, since it was clearly taken into account that the soldiers were on occasion unable to bear the physical and psychological pressure.2289 Since the captured deserters were generally granted suspended sentences in order to get them back to the front, a veritable loop began. Prison was by no means a deterrent, since it was preferable to be imprisoned and hope for amnesty than to let oneself be killed. Family members encouraged this practice, or they were even the reason for desertion, since relationships at home caused the men to flee. This took place frequently not with the intention to escape permanently, but to care for relatives or help the family  – as the only surviving male member  – in cultivating the field and tending to the farm.2290