Final Report of the International Commission on the - Minority Rights ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

mystification in order to bring into relief <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>rwise genuine participation <strong>of</strong> Hungarian authorities in <strong>the</strong> Nazi “<strong>Final</strong> Solution” or to publicize <strong>the</strong> zeal and <strong>the</strong> cruelty <strong>of</strong> Hungarian gendarmes. Relative to o<strong>the</strong>r European countries that were parties to <strong>the</strong> war, to <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> victims and <strong>the</strong> size <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> territory on which deportations and massacres took place, Romania has a relatively small number <strong>of</strong> people who have been granted <strong>the</strong> title <strong>of</strong> “Righteous among Nations”: sixty, including those who acted in Nor<strong>the</strong>rn Transylvania. As argued below, this can be explained by a number <strong>of</strong> contextual variables. Public Reaction: Between Hostility, Indifference and Compassion Despite <strong>the</strong> Antonescu regime’s antisemitic propaganda, Romanian society <strong>of</strong> those years did not become a fanatical society. The outcome <strong>of</strong> this propaganda was instead a kind <strong>of</strong> neutralization <strong>of</strong> public reaction, a sort <strong>of</strong> de-sensitization <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> population toward whatever was happening to <strong>the</strong> Jews. The reactions <strong>of</strong> compassion and revolt were accompanied by passive acceptance <strong>of</strong> killings and even active participation in antisemitic policies. However, <strong>the</strong> study <strong>of</strong> interwar Romanian intellectual life shows that Romania did indeed have a democratic tradition and that many public figures, such as democratic intellectuals (with left-wing affiliations or not), writers and even politicians, opposed <strong>the</strong> antisemitism <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 1930s. Highly competent and influential in <strong>the</strong> intellectual debate at <strong>the</strong> beginning <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 1930s, <strong>the</strong>se people lost ground after 1935 and after 1937. After <strong>the</strong> suspension <strong>of</strong> democratic journals, <strong>the</strong>y were effectively silenced. When Jews were excluded from pr<strong>of</strong>essional associations, and <strong>the</strong> Goga government passed and enforced antisemitic legislation in December 1937, <strong>the</strong>ir critical voices were virtually mute. There were numerous intellectuals who adopted antisemitic attitudes because <strong>the</strong>y passively identified with <strong>the</strong> most influential representatives <strong>of</strong> past and contemporary Romanian nationalism. The events <strong>of</strong> 1940 (<strong>the</strong> loss <strong>of</strong> Bessarabia and Nor<strong>the</strong>rn Bukovina to <strong>the</strong> Soviets and <strong>the</strong>n <strong>of</strong> Nor<strong>the</strong>rn Transylvania to Hungary) made <strong>the</strong> issue <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> discrimination against <strong>the</strong> Jews a topic <strong>of</strong> secondary importance in Romanian intellectual milieus. It remains a fact that when <strong>the</strong> Antonescu regime and its alliance with Hitler brought hope for <strong>the</strong> retrieval <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ceded territories, <strong>the</strong> reestablishment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Greater Romania <strong>of</strong> 1918, and <strong>the</strong> removal <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> “Bolshevik danger,” many democratic intellectuals chose to support <strong>the</strong> Antonescu dictatorship. Historical and political circumstances account for <strong>the</strong> widely different destinies <strong>of</strong> Jews from various regions <strong>of</strong> Romania during <strong>the</strong> war. Under Antonescu, Romania was a Nazi ally and consequently joined Germany in its attack on <strong>the</strong> Soviet Union with <strong>the</strong> stated intent to retrieve <strong>the</strong> ceded territories. Jewish populations in <strong>the</strong>se territories (200,000 in Bessarabia, 93,000 in Nor<strong>the</strong>rn Bukovina, almost 200,000 in Transylvania and Banat) were regarded as hostile and foreign, and were slated for extermination in Antonescu’s “cleansing <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> land.” A huge propaganda machine was set up in <strong>the</strong> army and civil service to portray this population and, by extension, all Jews as an embodiment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> “Bolshevik danger.” This propaganda machine represented <strong>the</strong> Jewish population in <strong>the</strong> ceded territories as <strong>the</strong> culprits <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> maiming, humiliation, and even <strong>the</strong> killing <strong>of</strong> many withdrawing Romanian soldiers in <strong>the</strong> summer <strong>of</strong> 1940. The situation <strong>of</strong> Jews under <strong>the</strong> Antonescu regime fluctuated by regions, usually with proximity to <strong>the</strong> front as <strong>the</strong> most important variable. The antisemitic atmosphere in Romania was prefigured in 1939 by outbursts <strong>of</strong> antisemitism and was marked in 1940 by various forms <strong>of</strong> physical violence against <strong>the</strong> Jews. Antonescu’s military dictatorship brought harsh censorship and a nearly total silence on <strong>the</strong> fate <strong>of</strong> Jews in Romanian public life. This was particularly so after <strong>the</strong> outbreak <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> war. The fact that, despite <strong>the</strong> alliance with Germany, Antonescu was <strong>the</strong> leader <strong>of</strong> an independent country that developed its own policy on “<strong>the</strong> solution to <strong>the</strong> Jewish problem” had a dramatic impact on <strong>the</strong> Jews living in Romania and in Romanian-occupied territories. The measures taken by Antonescu to deport or massacre <strong>the</strong> Jews were
perceived by a significant part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Romanian population as necessary to <strong>the</strong> war <strong>of</strong> national survival and re-unification. Undoubtedly, <strong>the</strong>re was a somewhat general consensus in Romania on participating in <strong>the</strong> war against <strong>the</strong> Soviet Union. This consensus was only slightly diminished by <strong>the</strong> huge number <strong>of</strong> Romanian soldiers and <strong>of</strong>ficers who became casualties <strong>of</strong> war. The antisemitic rhetorical repertoire now included blaming Romanian military failures on <strong>the</strong> Eastern Front on alleged acts <strong>of</strong> Jewish espionage committed on behalf <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Red Army. Under <strong>the</strong>se circumstances, to save Jews or express compassion for <strong>the</strong>m became unpatriotic and demanded great courage and strength <strong>of</strong> character, even when <strong>the</strong> risk was minimal. A good indication <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> morale <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Romanian citizens, including that <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Jews, can be found in <strong>the</strong> diaries <strong>of</strong> Jewish intellectuals during those years. Their human and personal perspectives help to provide a better understanding <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> nature and sense <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> relationships between Jewish and Romanian intellectuals. They also show individual cases <strong>of</strong> contradictory and inconsistent conduct <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Romanian authorities, who made distinctions between “our” Jews (Jews from <strong>the</strong> Regat) and “foreign” Jews (Jews from Bessarabia and Bukovina) and <strong>the</strong> variation <strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong>ficial policies towards <strong>the</strong> Jews. What is characteristic for Romania is <strong>the</strong> fact that un<strong>of</strong>ficial channels <strong>of</strong> communications between Jewish leaders and intellectuals on one hand, and Romanian government representatives and influential politicians on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r, existed throughout <strong>the</strong> period, which eased <strong>the</strong> flow <strong>of</strong> information on <strong>the</strong> developments in state policies toward <strong>the</strong> Jews. This sometimes led to confusion and panic because <strong>the</strong> signals sent by Romanian <strong>of</strong>ficials sometimes seemed to indicate policy vacillations or <strong>the</strong> possibility <strong>of</strong> instant decision-making, whe<strong>the</strong>r with beneficial or catastrophic consequences. Jewish intellectuals <strong>of</strong>ten recorded <strong>the</strong>ir thoughts about <strong>the</strong> vehemently antisemitic <strong>of</strong>ficial policy as well as <strong>the</strong> issue <strong>of</strong> personal responsibility for what was happening to <strong>the</strong> Jews. On August 5, 1941, for example, Jewish writer Mihail Sebastian noted <strong>the</strong> reaction <strong>of</strong> his good friend, Romanian diplomat C. Visoianu, upon learning <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Iasi massacre in <strong>the</strong> summer <strong>of</strong> 1941: Each time I see a Jew I am tempted to approach him, greet him and tell him: “Sir, please believe me I have nothing to do with this.” The sad thing is that no one admits having anything to do with it. Everybody disapproves, everybody is revolted, yet to a no lesser extent everyone is a cog in this huge antisemitic factory that is <strong>the</strong> Romanian state, with its <strong>of</strong>fices, with its press, with its institutions and with its laws. I don’t know if I have to laugh when Vivi (C. Visoianu, editors’s note) or Braniste assure me that General Mazarini or General Nicolescu are “astonished” and “revolted” at what is happening. Yet beyond astonishment or revolt, <strong>the</strong>y and ano<strong>the</strong>r ten thousand people like <strong>the</strong>m sign, ratify and acquiesce to what is going on, not only through passivity, but also through direct participation. A certain “awakening” <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> public opinion was evident with respect to <strong>the</strong> deportation <strong>of</strong> Regat Jews planned in <strong>the</strong> Romanian-Nazi deal <strong>of</strong> summer 1942. Many Bucharest intellectuals suspected <strong>of</strong> leaning toward communism personally protested <strong>the</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> this plan, and beginning in fall 1942 <strong>the</strong> planned deportation <strong>of</strong> Regat Jews was also faced with <strong>the</strong> resistance <strong>of</strong> a number <strong>of</strong> opposition politicians from Romania’s main parties, such as Iuliu Maniu (head <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> National Peasant Party; NPP), Nicolae Lupu and Ion Mihalache (also NPP leaders), and Constantin I.C. Bratianu (National Liberal Party leader). The Romanian Orthodox Church also protested, although until <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> leadership <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Church had been traditionally hostile to <strong>the</strong> Jewish community; <strong>the</strong> intervention <strong>of</strong> Nicolae Balan, <strong>the</strong> mitropolit <strong>of</strong> Transylvania, was notable in this respect. Moreover, representatives <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Romanian royal house, particularly Queen Mo<strong>the</strong>r Elena, made similar efforts. O<strong>the</strong>r examples include <strong>the</strong> critique <strong>of</strong> racial discrimination and <strong>the</strong> deportations articulated by Prince Barbu Stirbey and NPP ex-members <strong>of</strong> Parliament, Nicusor Graur and Ioan Hudita. Graur lambasted also <strong>the</strong> Transnistria deportations <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>
Page 1 and 2:
Final Repo
Page 3 and 4:
Germany’s war against the
Page 5 and 6:
which includes reputed experts led
Page 7 and 8:
BACKGROUND AND PRECURSORS TO THE HO
Page 9 and 10:
against which antisemites in <stron
Page 11 and 12:
declaring in the p
Page 13 and 14:
them. Thus, he con
Page 15 and 16:
We must organize ourselves for a wa
Page 17 and 18:
ureaucracy of wart
Page 19 and 20:
this direction by Nicolae C. Paules
Page 21 and 22:
promising leader of</strong
Page 23 and 24:
organized a tariff and tax strike.
Page 25 and 26:
Legion of
Page 27 and 28:
less so in Romanian society as a wh
Page 29 and 30:
This ambiguous, self-contradictory
Page 31 and 32:
The Gigurtu government began to con
Page 33 and 34:
The Case of Român
Page 35 and 36:
Cuza’s argument that it is possib
Page 37 and 38:
Românesc,” Sociologie Româneasc
Page 39 and 40:
ole in the early 1
Page 41 and 42:
European states, notably Romania an
Page 43 and 44:
Germany's immediate interests at <s
Page 45 and 46:
eligious communities, the</
Page 47 and 48:
counterpart, “when [he] first met
Page 49 and 50:
de Istorie şi Arheologie, “A. D.
Page 51 and 52:
Romania. Muler to Luthe</st
Page 53 and 54:
demands on territorial revisions an
Page 55 and 56:
military mission to come to Romania
Page 57 and 58:
High Command, informing the
Page 59 and 60:
The Jews and the R
Page 61 and 62:
Romanian army. Thus, in Ciudei in <
Page 63 and 64:
antisemitism in Romanian society an
Page 65 and 66:
Ibid., fond Micro-films, roll I.II,
Page 67 and 68:
manifestations of
Page 69 and 70:
power, as this power colonized West
Page 71 and 72:
attraction, many Jews resettled in
Page 73 and 74:
to defend itself; hence its support
Page 75 and 76:
about the Holocaus
Page 77 and 78:
Nichifor Crainic, “Dupa douazeci
Page 79 and 80:
Isaia Tolan, “Revizuirea incetate
Page 81 and 82:
X. Y. Z., “Rezolvarea problemei e
Page 83 and 84:
andom searches and arrests, robberi
Page 85 and 86:
Bucharest Prefectura. Almost two th
Page 87 and 88:
epression was not ordered by Antone
Page 89 and 90:
from villages and small towns. On J
Page 91 and 92:
accident; it was contrived by <stro
Page 93 and 94:
The second train to leave Iasi for
Page 95 and 96:
care of th
Page 97 and 98:
"premilitary," were also placed at
Page 99 and 100:
according to the o
Page 101 and 102:
Tighina Agreement On August 30, Tra
Page 103 and 104:
elieved Transnistria would be occup
Page 105 and 106:
the 331,000 Ukrain
Page 107 and 108:
those inside to take the</s
Page 109 and 110:
[longer] move.” After several wee
Page 111 and 112:
eappear a few seconds later and sig
Page 113 and 114:
operation and that “some
Page 115 and 116:
Bukovina and Bessarabia. Einsatzkom
Page 117 and 118:
other things, <str
Page 119 and 120:
Berezovka district and burn <strong
Page 121 and 122:
them in exchange f
Page 123 and 124:
transport of 2,000
Page 125 and 126:
Bulgarian, Turkish, Italian, or Swi
Page 127 and 128:
were at least 122,000 Jews. Bukovin
Page 129 and 130:
Wilhelm Hoettl, The Secret Front: T
Page 131 and 132:
Ancel, Documents, vol. 2: no. 136,
Page 133 and 134:
Carp, Cartea neagra, vol. 3: pp. 30
Page 135 and 136:
Gosudartsveni Archiv Odeskoi Oblast
Page 137 and 138:
Cable from the Mil
Page 139 and 140:
1-1087, p. 114; list of</st
Page 141 and 142:
Ibid. “Rezolvarea problemei evrei
Page 143 and 144:
child’s birth, would be considere
Page 145 and 146:
Indeed, the system
Page 147 and 148:
Romanianization instead of<
Page 149 and 150:
The Cultural Ghettoization
Page 151 and 152:
The Status of Jewi
Page 153 and 154:
give up any radios able to send and
Page 155 and 156:
Conclusions The anti-Jewish legisla
Page 157 and 158:
L.A., no. 99, p. 344. Trei ani de g
Page 159 and 160:
moral, social, and intellectual nee
Page 161 and 162:
gradually, in reality the</
Page 163 and 164:
except being defined as a Jew. I be
Page 165 and 166:
egulate and authorize, under <stron
Page 167 and 168:
y Lecca: Jews were privileged, and
Page 169 and 170:
through the activi
Page 171 and 172:
oth as a cry of re
Page 173 and 174:
After coming to power, the<
Page 175 and 176:
and then to send <
Page 177 and 178:
their non-evacuate
Page 179 and 180: villages of <stron
Page 181 and 182: Return of Roma Sur
Page 183 and 184: (in many cases, the</strong
Page 185 and 186: in Romania. History and Contemporar
Page 187 and 188: THE ROLE OF ION ANTONESCU IN THE PL
Page 189 and 190: December 16, 1941, meeting
Page 191 and 192: me from carrying out the</s
Page 193 and 194: did not do it because…the
Page 195 and 196: more ironically, this leader’s wa
Page 197 and 198: THE HOLOCAUST IN NORTHERN TRANSYLVA
Page 199 and 200: Others 22 968 Magy
Page 201 and 202: ultimatum but also consented to <st
Page 203 and 204: military, political, and psychologi
Page 205 and 206: command over the g
Page 207 and 208: Huedin. The Jews of</strong
Page 209 and 210: authorities set up two ghettos in <
Page 211 and 212: Secuilor counties was carried out i
Page 213 and 214: the procedure foll
Page 215 and 216: deportation trains per day. While E
Page 217 and 218: Deportation Trains from Nor
Page 219 and 220: Câtcău Kackó Ciuc Csík Ciucea C
Page 221 and 222: Rona de Sus Felsöróna Rozavica Ro
Page 223 and 224: Bözödújfalu Bezidu Nou Budfalva
Page 225 and 226: Nagysajó Şieu (Bistrita-Nasaud Co
Page 227 and 228: (Indictment of Naz
Page 229: Randolph L. Braham, comp. and ed. (
Page 233 and 234: Romanian government not to adopt <s
Page 235 and 236: still alive in the
Page 237 and 238: the Jews who worke
Page 239 and 240: We have been informed that various
Page 241 and 242: church bells announce the</
Page 243 and 244: Mitropolit pleaded with Mihai Anton
Page 245 and 246: Pozdnyakova, Yefrosiniya Starostina
Page 247 and 248: Ibid., pp. 224-225. Ibid., pp. 46-4
Page 249 and 250: the examined cases
Page 251 and 252: escape with negligible punishment;
Page 253 and 254: immense scale, enslaved millions <s
Page 255 and 256: means. The “ethnic Christian stat
Page 257 and 258: it is evident that the</str
Page 259 and 260: face să pară evident că victimel
Page 261 and 262: viaţă, 100 milioane lei amendă
Page 263 and 264: Articolul 15 al Convenţiei de armi
Page 265 and 266: members accepted as authoritative s
Page 267 and 268: camp in January 1945, for several m
Page 269 and 270: Beginning in the 1
Page 271 and 272: such access was strictly supervised
Page 273 and 274: enefit from translation into Englis
Page 275 and 276: furthermore, he ha
Page 277 and 278: lucrative Jewish business ever,”
Page 279 and 280: deaths of thousand
Page 281 and 282:
Treptow who was residing in Romania
Page 283 and 284:
Finally, it must b
Page 285 and 286:
A.) Integral Negationism Although <
Page 287 and 288:
other genocides re
Page 289 and 290:
mankind, such as wars; the<
Page 291 and 292:
age of 44, only on
Page 293 and 294:
After deploring the</strong
Page 295 and 296:
Michael Shafir, “Ex Occidente Obs
Page 297 and 298:
See, for example, Giurescu who make
Page 299 and 300:
Randolph L. Braham, Romanian Nation
Page 301 and 302:
Mediafax, March 18, 2002, Monitorul
Page 303 and 304:
See Ibidem, pp. 3, 54-55. Ibidem, p
Page 305 and 306:
Radu Theodoru, Mareşalul, Editura
Page 307 and 308:
egained from the U
Page 309 and 310:
was a record of an
Page 311 and 312:
secondary school use. Those institu
Page 313:
including erecting statues, mountin
show all

Final Report of the International Commission on the - Minority Rights ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?