Compensation Schemes Following Forced Migration Movements in the 20th Century: A Comparative Perspective on Ottoman Greeks, Greek Muslims, East Germans, Palestinians, and Iraqi Jews

IF 0.2 4区 历史学 Q2 HISTORY Turkish Historical Review Pub Date : 2023-10-09 DOI:10.1163/18775462-bja10053
Ellinor Morack
{"title":"Compensation Schemes Following Forced Migration Movements in the 20th Century: A Comparative Perspective on Ottoman Greeks, Greek Muslims, East Germans, Palestinians, and Iraqi Jews","authors":"Ellinor Morack","doi":"10.1163/18775462-bja10053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article compares the policies of compensation implemented after five cases of forced migration in the 20th century. Compensation for property left behind was discussed in all these cases, but only implemented in some. One might think that compensation may have been easier when “abandoned” property was available and some form of “exchange” was engineered, but the relative failure of the Greek, Turkish, Palestinian, and Israeli cases and the relative success of the German ones suggest that the opposite may be true. This may be due to compensation systems being based on the principle of redistributory justice, rather than restoration of pre-conflict levels of wealth. Moreover, I argue that unilateral compensation schemes worked better than multilateral ones. However, in the long run, the most important factor impacting the refugees’ successful integration does not seem to have been compensation, but economic development, the granting of citizenship, and civil rights.","PeriodicalId":41042,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Historical Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Historical Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18775462-bja10053","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This article compares the policies of compensation implemented after five cases of forced migration in the 20th century. Compensation for property left behind was discussed in all these cases, but only implemented in some. One might think that compensation may have been easier when “abandoned” property was available and some form of “exchange” was engineered, but the relative failure of the Greek, Turkish, Palestinian, and Israeli cases and the relative success of the German ones suggest that the opposite may be true. This may be due to compensation systems being based on the principle of redistributory justice, rather than restoration of pre-conflict levels of wealth. Moreover, I argue that unilateral compensation schemes worked better than multilateral ones. However, in the long run, the most important factor impacting the refugees’ successful integration does not seem to have been compensation, but economic development, the granting of citizenship, and civil rights.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
20 世纪强迫移民迁移后的补偿计划:奥斯曼希腊人、希腊穆斯林、东德人、巴勒斯坦人和伊拉克犹太人的比较视角
摘要本文比较了20世纪五起强迫移民事件后的补偿政策。所有这些案件都讨论了对遗留财产的赔偿,但只在一些案件中实施了赔偿。有人可能会认为,当“被遗弃的”财产可以获得,并且设计了某种形式的“交换”时,赔偿可能会更容易,但希腊、土耳其、巴勒斯坦和以色列案例的相对失败以及德国案例的相对成功表明,事实可能恰恰相反。这可能是由于薪酬制度基于再分配正义的原则,而不是恢复冲突前的财富水平。此外,我认为,单边补偿方案比多边补偿方案效果更好。然而,从长远来看,影响难民成功融入社会的最重要因素似乎不是补偿,而是经济发展、公民身份的授予和公民权利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: The Turkish Historical Review is devoted to Turkish history in the widest sense, covering the period from the 6th century, with the rise of the Turks in Central Asia, to the 20th century. All contributions to the journal must display a substantial use of primary-source material and also be accessible to historians in general, i.e. those working outside the specific fields of Ottoman and Turkish history. Articles with a comparative scope which cross the traditional boundaries of the area studies paradigm are therefore very welcome. The editors also encourage younger scholars to submit contributions. The journal includes a reviews section, which, in addition to publications in English, French, and other western European languages, will specifically monitor new studies in Turkish and those coming out in the Balkans, Russia and the Middle East. The Turkish Historical Review has a double-blind peer review system.
期刊最新文献
War Tax Law (Tekalif-i Harbiye): An Instrument of Dispossession and Capital Accumulation in the Ottoman Empire during the Great War U.S. Commercial Diplomacy Toward Turkey: Ambassador George C. McGhee’s Role in the Privatization of the Oil Business in the 1950s Justice of the Peace Courts in the Adjudication of Property Disputes in the Ottoman Countryside (1839–1914) The Christian Population of 16th-Century Ottoman Anatolia: An Overview and Preliminary Observations on Its Location and Numbers in the 1520s Diplomacy Within the Security Framework in Turkey and Romania During the Interwar Period
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1