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

The Antonescu regime arose against <strong>the</strong> backdrop <strong>of</strong> tumultuous political and social developments in
Romania during <strong>the</strong> 1930s. “The national-totalitarian regime, <strong>the</strong> regime <strong>of</strong> national and social
restoration,” as Antonescu described it, was an attempt to realize nationalist ideas and demands, which
preceded <strong>the</strong> 1940 crisis, when Romania was thrown into turmoil after being forced to cede parts <strong>of</strong> its
territory to its neighbors. However, even as this crisis precipitated Antonescu’s rise to power, his regime
owed its existence to Nazi rule in Eastern Europe.
The Antonescu regime, which was rife with ideological contradictions and was considerably different
from o<strong>the</strong>r fascist regimes in Europe, remains difficult to classify. It was a fascist regime that dissolved
<strong>the</strong> Parliament, joined <strong>the</strong> Axis powers, enacted antisemitic and racial legislation, and adopted <strong>the</strong> “<strong>Final</strong>
Solution” in parts <strong>of</strong> its territory. At <strong>the</strong> same time, however, Antonescu brutally crushed <strong>the</strong> Romanian
Iron Guard movement and denounced <strong>the</strong>ir terrorist methods. Moreover, some <strong>of</strong> Romania’s antisemitic
laws, including <strong>the</strong> “Organic Law,” which was <strong>the</strong> basis for Antonescu’s antisemitic legislation, were in
force before Antonescu assumed power. And, <strong>the</strong> regime did succeed in sparing half <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Jews under its
rule during <strong>the</strong> Holocaust.
The political and ideological foundations <strong>of</strong> Antonescu’s regime were established earlier by
prominent Romanian intellectuals, extremist right wing and traditional antisemitic movements, nationalist
politicians who opposed democracy in Romania, and nationalist organizations and political parties that
arose in <strong>the</strong> 1930s under King Carol II. Even prior to <strong>the</strong>se developments, <strong>the</strong> Romanian system <strong>of</strong>
parliamentary democracy had been destabilized and its principles challenged from various quarters.
Antonescu did not redefine <strong>the</strong> goals <strong>of</strong> Romanian nationalism; ra<strong>the</strong>r, he sought to achieve <strong>the</strong>m. Thus, it
appears that <strong>the</strong> political philosophy <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> new regime, its methods <strong>of</strong> rule, and its ideologicalintellectual
matrix were distinctly Romanian and not imported from Germany; and <strong>the</strong>y were inextricably
bound with <strong>the</strong> local hatred <strong>of</strong> Jews.
Likewise, <strong>the</strong> underlying principles <strong>of</strong> Antonescu’s “ethnocratic state” were conceived earlier — in
1932 by Nichifor Crainic, <strong>the</strong> veteran Christian-nationalist and antisemitic combatant who would serve
for a brief spell as Antonescu’s minister <strong>of</strong> propaganda, and by Octavian Goga, leader <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> National
Christian Party with A.C. Cuza. Crainic insisted that his program was an elaboration <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Romanian
nationalism formulated as early as 1909 by one <strong>of</strong> Romania’s outstanding intellectuals, Nicolae Iorga:
“Romania for Romanians, all Romanians, and only Romanians.” The cosmopolitan, multi-cultural
foundation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> democratic state, Crainic pointed out, “cannot create a nation-state.” Crainic’s concept
<strong>of</strong> an ethnocratic state was also based on <strong>the</strong> fundamental principle that “<strong>the</strong> Jews pose a permanent threat
to every nation-state.” His call for <strong>the</strong> nationalization <strong>of</strong> Jewish property as well as o<strong>the</strong>r “practical”
ideas, were translated into antisemitic statutes under Antonescu and served as benchmarks for
Antonescu’s policies. The core <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Romanian rendition <strong>of</strong> fascism, as reflected in Antonescu’s regime
without <strong>the</strong> Legionnaires, consisted not only <strong>of</strong> antisemitism, but also <strong>the</strong> rejection <strong>of</strong> fundamental
Western philosophies: liberalism, tolerance, democracy, freedom <strong>of</strong> speech, freedom <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> press,
freedom <strong>of</strong> organization, open elections and civil rights.
After <strong>the</strong> Legionary rebellion was put down, <strong>the</strong> Antonescu regime considered itself to be <strong>the</strong>
successor <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> political, cultural, and spiritual ideas <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> antisemitic nationalism <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Goga
government. In short, <strong>the</strong> Antonescu regime adopted <strong>the</strong> objectives <strong>of</strong> this Romanian fascist ideology
ra<strong>the</strong>r than drawing upon <strong>the</strong> principles <strong>of</strong> National Socialism. Antonescu’s regime without <strong>the</strong>
Legionnaires did not negate <strong>the</strong> antisemitic legacy <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Legionary movement and did not cease <strong>the</strong> state
onslaught on <strong>the</strong> Judaic faith and values or on humanist values. Ra<strong>the</strong>r than negating <strong>the</strong> antisemitic
legacy <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Legionary movement, <strong>the</strong> Antonescu regime made it clear that it would continue <strong>the</strong>
antisemitic policies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> National Legionary government. An antisemitic journal even warned <strong>the</strong> Jews
who felt relieved after <strong>the</strong> repression <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Legionary rebellion to stop deluding <strong>the</strong>mselves, because <strong>the</strong>