What was the wannsee conference yahoo

Share Information. Specialty Products. Catalogs, Flyers and Price Lists. Open Access. Open Access for Authors. Open Access and Research Funding. Open Access for Librarians. Open Access for Academic Societies. About us. Stay updated. Corporate Social Responsiblity. Investor Relations. Review a Brill Book. This article focuses on the transfer of the Nazi legal and ideological model to East Central Europe and its subsequent adoption, modification and fusion with local legal-political practices.

What was the role played by the Nazi advisors in this process? Patel, and the two anonymous reviewers of Fascism. Journal of Comparative Fascist Studies for their valuable suggestions on earlier drafts. By and large, however, works on globalization, in general, and on forms of European continental or regional integration, in particular, have focused preponderantly on the rise of the new liberal international order under the terms of the Paris Peace Treaties.

At the same time, alternative illiberal visions for the reorganization of Europe harbored by Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany and partially implemented during the Second World War have received limited attention. Reorganized during the Second World War as a mosaic of occupational regimes, semi-independent protectorates and satellite states, East Central Europe was pivotal to the implementation of the Nazi ideological project, since it provided the Third Reich a vast terrain of territorial expansion and social-political experimentation.

Who were the mediators of these transfers? Although these questions are key to understanding the status of East Central Europe during the Second World War, they have been only partially tackled by historians. A majority of the existing works on the topic has approached the relationship between Nazi Germany and its satellite countries using the tools of diplomatic history. Often, such perspectives treat states as unitary, rational, and neatly-differentiated units; they also tend to divorce the study of foreign policy from the complicated web of domestic actors and policy constraints and to ignore the larger regional or international contexts of decision-making processes in favor of the narrower angle of bilateral relations.

In this article, to account for the transfer of the Nazi legal and political model to East Central Europe and its subsequent adoption, modification and even partial rejection, we employ the social constructivist theory in international relations, which posits that the foreign policy of a given state is concomitantly shaped by 1 processes of social interaction between domestic actors and state agencies, 2 its interaction with other states and supra-national organizations, and 3 the prevailing international law and norms.

These new approaches enable scholars to explore the exportation of political practices and institutions to foreign countries and their adaptation to a new environment in the receiving country through appropriation and acculturation.

They also highlight the importance of international interpersonal contacts involved in the process of transfer, the role played by individual or collective mediators, and the impact of media in the process of transmission. It was coercive because the New Order was implemented by Nazi Germany by military means, involving indirect control or direct occupation.

Even then, the transfer and implementation of the Nazi legal-political model in Romania was marked by numerous ambiguities. Beginning in Fall , with the aggravating military situation on the Eastern front, Antonescu eventually renounced his plan of deporting the Jews from the Banat and Southern Transylvania to Nazi camps. How can one account for these contradictory policies? Their dispatch to Bucharest coincided with the accreditation of two other advisors with similar duties to the German diplomatic missions in Bratislava and Zagreb.

To this end, in , in agreement with the Romanian authorities, Richter advanced a concrete plan for the deportations of Jews from the Old Kingdom and southern Transylvania to death camps set up in occupied Polish territories.

Romania was the last country in Europe to emancipate its Jewish population — Governmental Jewish policies in the two countries interacted with each other at several critical juncture-points, colliding in and , but converging — in markedly different circumstances — in — In , the Jewish policies of Romania and Nazi Germany converged, but on an anti-Semitic platform; both countries reversed the emancipation of Jews and implemented a full-fledged system of discrimination, deportation and extermination, with Nazi Germany providing both the political impetus and the model for such policies.

The presence of Jews on the territory of present-day Romania is attested since antiquity, yet they settled in greater number on the territory of the two Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia starting in the sixteenth century, when they formed organized communities. At the same time, Jews were excluded from marring Christians and from substantive civil or economic rights, such as the right to buy landed estates. The creation of the Romanian modern nation-state through the union of Moldavia and Wallachia radically altered the legal status of Jews.

Adopted in , the new modern Civil Code transformed all non-Christians into foreigners and demanded them to undergo a ten-year long process of naturalization in order to become full citizens.

Two years later, a new constitution adopted in further worsened the status of Jews by permanently excluding non-Christians from access to naturalization art. The exclusion of Jews from citizenship rights in Romania generated a strong international reaction. Yet, in order to deliberately avoid a collective emancipation of the Jewish population, the amendment to the Constitution allowed only an individual naturalization of Jews by the Parliament. Consequently, despite the apparent liberalization of naturalization policies in , the restrictive stipulations of the Constitution of Romania de facto excluded non-Christian permanent residents from citizenship.

Given the lengthy and complex naturalization procedures, only a small number of naturalizations were passed in the following decades: by , only 10, Jewish residents managed to acquire Romanian citizenship including 3, Jews living in the newly-annexted province of Dobrudja , while , Jews were still non-citizen permanent residents.

During the First World War, the full emancipation of the Romanian Jews was imposed — yet again — by the diplomatic intervention of the Great Powers, having Germany at the forefront. On November 10, Romania denounced the separate peace concluded with the Central Powers, abolished all laws passed by the Parliament under German occupation, and re-entered the war as ally of the Entente.

Corroborated with the stipulations of the Peace Treaties, the Constitution of Romania and the new Citizenship Law completed the full civil and political emancipation of Jews. Despite their political offensive, until far-right parties proved unable to dismantle the political order established by the Constitution, their calls for numerous clauses being rejected.

The denaturalization of the Romanian Jews and their exclusion from rights was initiated in , being facilitated by the erosion of electoral support for the leading bourgeois-democratic parties manifest in the outcome of the November elections. The inconclusive electoral results led to a crisis of the parliamentary political regime, skillfully instrumentalized by the authoritarian-minded king Carol II ruled — Cuza and Octavian Goga — despite it having won only ten per cent of the total number of votes at national level.

On January 22, , the new government led by Goga passed a decree demanding the revision of all entries in the registries of nationality made in the period — Following the implementation of the decree, , persons or The decrees stripped the entire Jewish population of substantive political and civic rights, such as the right to settle in the countryside and buy rural properties, access to state positions, and the right to marry Christians.

The decrees differentiated among several categories of Jews, favoring the Jews who had been emancipated by the Parliament, either individually or collectively, for fighting in the Romanian army, but discriminating against the Jews emancipated under the Minority Convention. One of the first attempts in this respect was made by Eugen Petit, an Honorific Councilor of the High Court of Cassation, in two articles published July 28 and September 15, in the leading journal Dreptul [The Law].

In the second article published after the proclamation of National-Legionary State, Petit took a more radical position, arguing for the implementation of a legal distinction between Arians and non-Arians. The abdication of king Carol ii and the establishment of the National Legionary State on September 14, set the Romanian-German relations on a new basis, enhancing the political role played by German representatives in Romania.

Until that time, the Romanian secret service had worked mainly with the Abwehr , while the sd had only a decorative role in the counter-sabotage actions undertaking by Germany on Romanian territory. Although there is evidence that the Legionary Movement intended, at a certain point, to cooperate with the Abwehr, its main partners remained, nevertheless, the sd and the ss. The power conflict between the two parts was well known in Berlin. The avalanche of alarming information received by the Nazi leadership via multiple diplomatic, military, and intelligence channels about the chaos and disorganization that characterized the National-Legionary State led gradually to a growing skepticism within Nazi circles about the viability of the ad-hoc ruling alliance between Antonescu and the Legion.

Yet, Nazi leadership did not have a unitary position on this conflict. By and large, two opposing views can be distinguished: A first one, prevalent mostly within the Wehrmacht and the German Foreign Office, regarded Antonescu as the main guarantor of political stability in Romania, and a most valuable ally of Berlin in the prospective invasion of Soviet Union the Barbarossa operation. These opposing positions were also linked with the ongoing rivalry between the Abwehr and the rsha , both parts trying to find useful local allies for increasing their own influence in Romania.

Due to divergent perceptions and rival institutional interests, Nazi diplomatic and intelligence agencies gave different and, at times, even conflicting signals to the two parts in conflict, the Legion and General Antonescu.

Faced with a choice, Hitler decided to back General Antonescu, giving him free hand in ousting the Legion from power. As in other countries in the region, the Third Reich thus promoted a Realpolitik agenda in Romania, subordinating its ideological affinities to urgent and more concrete economic and military needs. Only the enemies of truth can believe that General Antonescu will deter from the path of the creative forces of the Romanian nation and the attachment of our nation to the new spirit of the time and from the making of the future status-quo of South-Eastern Europe.

This new state will be based on Romanian primacy in all areas and will draw on our agrarian and peasant structure. The national and the social will be the cornerstones [of the new state]. We will accomplish without hesitation all the reforms necessary to remove … foreign influences, in order to safeguard our national destiny. The whole struggle of the great revolution of the German National Socialist and the Fascist achievements shall serve as grounds to graft, on our Romanian experience and needs, the fruit of this organization of nations, as a foundation for a new world.

Gustav Richter, in particular, was to play a central role in this respect. Richter was born on November 19, , in Stadtprozelten. After graduating high school, he joined the Hitlerjugend from April 16, to March 11, In May , he became a member of the nsdap , in November , an ss member, while in March Richter joined the sd and operated successively as a Referent within the sd Abschnitt Pfalz , the Ludwigshafen Abwehrstelle , with the main task of combating the ideological enemies of National Socialism, especially the Freemasons.

Citation: Fascism 4, 1 ; In early August , Reinhard Heydrich decided unilaterally, without explanation or prior warning, to recall both Gustav Richter and the advisor for the Jewish problem in Bratislava, Dieter Wisliceny. The termination or suspension of this activity would seriously endanger this success. As I could see even during my activity as a fighter pilot in Bessarabia and Ukraine, the behavior of the Romanians in the territories recently occupied in the East again brought out a strong attitude of friendship towards the Jews.

He also solicited the opinion of the Minister Plenipotentiary on the accusations against the Romanian government advanced by Heydrich. I think Heydrich does not want to make anyone available and is looking for justification. I recommend that he turns his attention to the Jewish question in Hungary, a country which today claims that, following the inhuman acts committed against the Jews, the Romanians should not be allowed rights over a cultural region such as Transylvania.

It is necessary to dispatch there [in Romania] an apt advisor on the Jewish and Aryanization questions, to replace Richter. Christopher R. The Germans want to bring all Kikes [ jidanii ] from Europe to Russia and to settle them in a particular region.

But until the execution [of this plan] there is time. Indeed, at the Wannsee conference Romania was formally mentioned among those states from which the Jews were to be deported, the statistics presented by Adolf Eichmann on that occasion mentioning the figure of , for Romania Bessarabia included.

On the contrary, Romanian vessels with Jewish refugees continued to leave for Palestine from Romanian ports — via Turkey — almost until the end of the Antonescu regime. During these discussions, Antonescu asked Richter if the information he received about the deportation of Jews from Slovakia to the east are real.

As a result, the day before his departure to Berlin on July 22, , Richter was convened by Mihai Antonescu at the seat of the Council of Ministers and was given a letter which conveyed the agreement of the Romanian government, including that of Marshal Ion Antonescu, for the deportation of the Jews from southern Transylvania and Banat. It might be time to follow suit. Find out how many millions he's earning now.

Kim Zolciak-Biermann is experiencing some drama away from the cameras. Bunnies aren't the only little, furry creatures that get to be all hippity-hoppity. The ambitious father who turned his two daughters Venus and Serena Williams into tennis […].

While the preview did not include any footage from the series, concept art appears to […]. Close this content. Read full article. A visitor stands next to gravestone of German philosopher Mendelssohn at Jewish cemetery in Berlin A visitor stands next to the gravestone of German philosopher Moses Mendelssohn at Grosse Hamburger Strasse Jewish cemetery in Berlin, October 31, Stephen Brown.

October 31, , PM. In this article:. More content below. German police official and head of the Gestapo Our goal is to create a safe and engaging place for users to connect over interests and passions. In order to improve our community experience, we are temporarily suspending article commenting. Recommended Stories. A significant percentage of these victims were foreign or stateless Jews, sacrificed by the Vichy government in a vain attempt to spare France's indigenous Jewish population. The final destination of these deportees was Auschwitz , where the SS murdered the vast majority by means of poison gas shortly after their arrival.

Deportations of Jews from France in the summer and fall of spurred significant protest within the Catholic Church, a mainstay of the Petain regime, and among the general population. The brutal nature of the roundups, such as the razzia and incarceration in the Velodrome d'Hiver, stirred public anger. The initial decision to separate children from their families during the deportation process met with particular criticism. The calculated strategy of the Vichy administration to collaborate with German deportation efforts in order to gain more independence for unoccupied France had failed.

The Petain government's willingness to surrender foreign Jews in hopes of shielding French Jewish nationals had increasingly obligated Vichy officials to fill all deportation quotas demanded by German authorities, who did not concern themselves with the niceties of nationality and citizenship. As elsewhere in territories they controlled, Italian authorities refused to enforce antisemitic legislation seriously, or to hand over Jews to Germans officials, despite repeated German demands.

Thousands of Jews sought and received protection in the Italian zone until its occupation by German forces with Italy's surrender in September German authorities reinstituted transports of Jews from France in January and continued the deportations until August In all, some 77, Jews living on French territory perished in concentration camps and killing centers—the overwhelming majority of them at Auschwitz—or died in detention on French soil.

One third of these victims were French citizens. While French officials did not hesitate to meet German quotas for deportations with foreign or stateless Jews living on their soil, they were less enthusiastic in sacrificing French Jews to German demands.

As deportations resumed in , German administrators noted that French police seemed less committed to rounding up indigenous Jews, while Laval himself refused to strip French Jews of their citizenship to facilitate deportation.

Thanks to the obstruction of French officials, the vast majority of Jews with French citizenship survived the Holocaust. Yet the cost paid in lives was still enormous. The Allied landing in Normandy on June 6, , initiated the liberation of France. Members of the French resistance movement came from every economic milieu and from every element of the political spectrum: conservative nationalists; Catholic and Protestant clergymen; members of the beleaguered Jewish community; liberal republicans, and activists from the socialist and communist Left.

During the time of the occupation, resistance cells had carried out sabotage and guerilla actions against German and collaborationist authorities, circulated identification papers and documents for Jews and other persecutees, and maintained escape networks for Jews, forced laborers, and Allied POWs and troops trapped behind German lines.

Now resistance groups helped to speed the Allied advance against German forces. Within three months the country was free. Directly after liberation, the provisional government disbanded many of the collaborationist organizations, such as the Milice Francaise French Militia , the most significant paramilitary group created to combat the French Resistance movement.

Following a wave of popular judgments and summary executions of collaborators, the provisional government began a series of trials against leading Vichy officials. On August 15, , Marshall Petain was also condemned to death on treason charges. Due to his services in World War I and to his advanced age Petain was 89 at the time , de Gaulle commuted Petain's sentence to life imprisonment; he would die in Beginning in the mids, French jurisprudence undertook efforts to prosecute several individuals on charges of crimes against humanity for their respective roles in the Nazi genocide.

Christian Didier, a mentally ill individual who claimed to have made an attempt on the life of Klaus Barbie, assassinated Bousquet in his home in Paris on June 8, , shortly before Bousquet's trial was to take place. In , a Versailles court convicted Paul Touvier, head of the Milice' s Second Service, or intelligence branch, for the Lyons region, to life imprisonment for the murder of seven Jewish hostages at Rillieux-la-Pape, near Lyon.

Touvier died of prostate cancer in in Fresnes prison near Paris. In , a court in Bordeaux convicted Maurice Papon for crimes against humanity for his participation in the deportation of over 1, Jews between and in his capacity as Secretary General for Police of the Prefecture of Bordeaux. Papon initially fled to Switzerland to elude his ten-year prison sentence, but was interned after his extradition to France in The year-old was released on medical grounds in September , and died in February Adler, Jacques.

New York: Oxford University Press,