Pub Date : 2022-05-01DOI: 10.1177/16118944221095133
Tatjana Tönsmeyer, J. von Puttkamer
The introduction outlines content and scope of this special issue on "Housing, Hiding and the Holocaust". It points out that during World War II-ccupation accommodation became a scarce commodity, with collapsing housing markets. As a consequence, in those places where the German army (and navy) was stationed, direct contact between the occupiers and the occupied couldn't be avoided. Worst hit by housing restrictions was the Jewish population, even prior to ghettoization. The introduction ends with a short outline of the following chapters, discussing France, the Netherlands, Norway and Poland. They all show profound ruptures in patterns of everyday normality while highlighting that the Jewish populations were doubly threatened: As members of occupied societies and as victims of the Nazi policy of genocide.
{"title":"Housing, Hiding and the Holocaust. Introduction","authors":"Tatjana Tönsmeyer, J. von Puttkamer","doi":"10.1177/16118944221095133","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16118944221095133","url":null,"abstract":"The introduction outlines content and scope of this special issue on \"Housing, Hiding and the Holocaust\". It points out that during World War II-ccupation accommodation became a scarce commodity, with collapsing housing markets. As a consequence, in those places where the German army (and navy) was stationed, direct contact between the occupiers and the occupied couldn't be avoided. Worst hit by housing restrictions was the Jewish population, even prior to ghettoization. The introduction ends with a short outline of the following chapters, discussing France, the Netherlands, Norway and Poland. They all show profound ruptures in patterns of everyday normality while highlighting that the Jewish populations were doubly threatened: As members of occupied societies and as victims of the Nazi policy of genocide.","PeriodicalId":44275,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern European History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45433463","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-01DOI: 10.1177/16118944221091113
N. Camilleri
Shooting associations represented one of the most popular expressions of sociability in Imperial Germany. Their club houses were to be found in large and medium-sized towns, in villages, and in overseas colonies, too. Middle class men would regularly gather to practice shooting and to organize competitions, activities characterized by clearly gendered rituals of social life. Based on values of loyalty to the Emperor and to fellow members, association life closely reflected the ideological agenda of the protestant Kaiserreich. Their popularity and pervasiveness earned shooting associations a place in George Mosse's groundbreaking work on the nationalization of the masses. Nevertheless, they have been mostly neglected in research on bourgeois sociability and on militarism. This article is the first scholarly attempt to study this form of associationism in Imperial Germany and its colonies. Having developed out of the old tradition of civic militias, shooting societies lost their primary policing and military function during the 19th century. However, community defence remained an essential task, which was viewed then as a moral and civil, rather than military, matter. The article examines the cultural and social aspects of shooting societies and relates this form of associationism to wider issues of military culture in the Kaiserreich.
{"title":"Gunshots, Sociability and Community Defence. Shooting Associations in Imperial Germany and its Colonies","authors":"N. Camilleri","doi":"10.1177/16118944221091113","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16118944221091113","url":null,"abstract":"Shooting associations represented one of the most popular expressions of sociability in Imperial Germany. Their club houses were to be found in large and medium-sized towns, in villages, and in overseas colonies, too. Middle class men would regularly gather to practice shooting and to organize competitions, activities characterized by clearly gendered rituals of social life. Based on values of loyalty to the Emperor and to fellow members, association life closely reflected the ideological agenda of the protestant Kaiserreich. Their popularity and pervasiveness earned shooting associations a place in George Mosse's groundbreaking work on the nationalization of the masses. Nevertheless, they have been mostly neglected in research on bourgeois sociability and on militarism. This article is the first scholarly attempt to study this form of associationism in Imperial Germany and its colonies. Having developed out of the old tradition of civic militias, shooting societies lost their primary policing and military function during the 19th century. However, community defence remained an essential task, which was viewed then as a moral and civil, rather than military, matter. The article examines the cultural and social aspects of shooting societies and relates this form of associationism to wider issues of military culture in the Kaiserreich.","PeriodicalId":44275,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern European History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48779511","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-01DOI: 10.1177/16118944221095621
Mary Fritsche
The article analyses the German requisition and quartering practices in Norway in the light of international law and traces their impact on everyday relations between the enemies. With an average of 350,000 soldiers stationed in Norway, the German demand for housing was enormous. Space became a highly coveted resource. It was both the object of power struggles and a reflection of those struggles. The German seizure of private property exacerbated the existing housing shortage and was thus very unpopular. Yet the fact that the Wehrmacht also paid good money for requisitioned private properties and, for the most part, followed ‘proper’ procedure fostered acceptance of the measures. Moreover, the spatial proximity with quartered soldiers inevitably led to frequent contacts between the enemies and resulted in a rapprochement. Many autobiographical accounts of Norwegians lauded the Wehrmacht soldiers’ ‘proper’ or ‘correct’ behaviour and described the relations between Norwegians and German soldiers during the war as harmonious. The Norwegian narratives of the German occupation are thus highly ambivalent, oscillating between a positive assessment of the ordinary soldier, and condemnation of the occupation and Nazi rule. This ambivalence, the article argues, was both the result of German requisition policy, aimed to win popular support, and of the felt need to justify the close contacts with the Germans.
{"title":"‘Correct German Conduct?’ German Requisition Practices and their Impact on Norwegian Society during World War II","authors":"Mary Fritsche","doi":"10.1177/16118944221095621","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16118944221095621","url":null,"abstract":"The article analyses the German requisition and quartering practices in Norway in the light of international law and traces their impact on everyday relations between the enemies. With an average of 350,000 soldiers stationed in Norway, the German demand for housing was enormous. Space became a highly coveted resource. It was both the object of power struggles and a reflection of those struggles. The German seizure of private property exacerbated the existing housing shortage and was thus very unpopular. Yet the fact that the Wehrmacht also paid good money for requisitioned private properties and, for the most part, followed ‘proper’ procedure fostered acceptance of the measures. Moreover, the spatial proximity with quartered soldiers inevitably led to frequent contacts between the enemies and resulted in a rapprochement. Many autobiographical accounts of Norwegians lauded the Wehrmacht soldiers’ ‘proper’ or ‘correct’ behaviour and described the relations between Norwegians and German soldiers during the war as harmonious. The Norwegian narratives of the German occupation are thus highly ambivalent, oscillating between a positive assessment of the ordinary soldier, and condemnation of the occupation and Nazi rule. This ambivalence, the article argues, was both the result of German requisition policy, aimed to win popular support, and of the felt need to justify the close contacts with the Germans.","PeriodicalId":44275,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern European History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42933195","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-01DOI: 10.1177/16118944221095624
Agnieszka Wierzcholska
As elsewhere in Poland, the German occupation deeply disrupted the relations and social dynamics between the non-Jewish population and the Jews in Tarnów from the very first day. Investigating housing, property and the urban space in a society under occupation, in a Kräftefeld dominated by the German occupiers, offers new insights into this relationship. It traces the notions of an ethnically encoded urban space back into the interwar period. It shows, how ethnic Poles came to understand the urban landscape as a battlefield already before 1939, and links this discourse to their subsequent stance towards the German occupation. Since almost half of Tarnów's inhabitants was of Jewish origin, the rapid expropriation of Jewish businesses and real estate and the subsequent murder of their owners in 1942 offered opportunities to non-Jewish Poles to become trustees. While the German occupiers where the primary beneficiaries, local inhabitants took part in the pillage. Some resisted. After the liquidation of the ghetto, few traces of the city's Jewish history and heritage remained.
{"title":"Occupied Towns in Poland: Housing, Property and the Urban Space during the Shoah","authors":"Agnieszka Wierzcholska","doi":"10.1177/16118944221095624","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16118944221095624","url":null,"abstract":"As elsewhere in Poland, the German occupation deeply disrupted the relations and social dynamics between the non-Jewish population and the Jews in Tarnów from the very first day. Investigating housing, property and the urban space in a society under occupation, in a Kräftefeld dominated by the German occupiers, offers new insights into this relationship. It traces the notions of an ethnically encoded urban space back into the interwar period. It shows, how ethnic Poles came to understand the urban landscape as a battlefield already before 1939, and links this discourse to their subsequent stance towards the German occupation. Since almost half of Tarnów's inhabitants was of Jewish origin, the rapid expropriation of Jewish businesses and real estate and the subsequent murder of their owners in 1942 offered opportunities to non-Jewish Poles to become trustees. While the German occupiers where the primary beneficiaries, local inhabitants took part in the pillage. Some resisted. After the liquidation of the ghetto, few traces of the city's Jewish history and heritage remained.","PeriodicalId":44275,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern European History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44735160","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-28DOI: 10.1177/16118944221095633
J. Kemperman, H. Piersma
During the occupation of the Netherlands, the Jewish population was systematically robbed and deprived of their property rights. Their economic and social isolation went hand in hand with a loss of social status, connectedness, security and identity, as homes were expropriated and furniture was confiscated. The process of depriving the Jews of everything they owned, which happened with such apparent ease by the seemingly all-powerful authorities, had a profound impact on the victims that went far beyond mere material loss. Furthermore, after the war, the restitution process confronted the survivors with bureaucratic procedures and formalities that evoked negative feelings among the persecuted victims. A strictly quantitative approach to compensation for the loss of furniture and other household items therefore seems to fall short. The view of loss as something that can be compensated with money does not take into account the psychological aspects of losing those personal possessions. This article pleads for a more qualitative approach to the subject of looting and restitution, free from the limitations imposed by the quantitative scope of official archives. The authors suggest that future research should relate more to the link between ‘dignity taking’ – a term that was coined by Bernadette Atuahene, professor of Law in Chicago – and ‘emotional loss’. Looking into property loss from an emotional perspective will teach us more about the fragility of settledness against the backdrop of occupation and persecution.
{"title":"Robbed and Dispossessed: The Emotional Impact of Property Loss during the German Occupation of the Netherlands, 1940–1945","authors":"J. Kemperman, H. Piersma","doi":"10.1177/16118944221095633","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16118944221095633","url":null,"abstract":"During the occupation of the Netherlands, the Jewish population was systematically robbed and deprived of their property rights. Their economic and social isolation went hand in hand with a loss of social status, connectedness, security and identity, as homes were expropriated and furniture was confiscated. The process of depriving the Jews of everything they owned, which happened with such apparent ease by the seemingly all-powerful authorities, had a profound impact on the victims that went far beyond mere material loss. Furthermore, after the war, the restitution process confronted the survivors with bureaucratic procedures and formalities that evoked negative feelings among the persecuted victims. A strictly quantitative approach to compensation for the loss of furniture and other household items therefore seems to fall short. The view of loss as something that can be compensated with money does not take into account the psychological aspects of losing those personal possessions. This article pleads for a more qualitative approach to the subject of looting and restitution, free from the limitations imposed by the quantitative scope of official archives. The authors suggest that future research should relate more to the link between ‘dignity taking’ – a term that was coined by Bernadette Atuahene, professor of Law in Chicago – and ‘emotional loss’. Looking into property loss from an emotional perspective will teach us more about the fragility of settledness against the backdrop of occupation and persecution.","PeriodicalId":44275,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern European History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49354531","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01DOI: 10.1177/16118944221077423
L. Madokoro
As refugees know, and scholars have demonstrated, there are many ways in which the international refugee regime is Eurocentric. This includes legal definitions of refugeehood, mental maps of who is a refugee, ideas about where refugees come from, and who takes the responsibility for receiving and caring for refugees. In the fields of Refugee Studies and Critical Refugee Studies there exists a robust literature on the question of Eurocentrism, particularly as regards the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, recognized as the cornerstone of the contemporary international refugee regime. There are many valid critiques. Yet the tendency to condemn existing practices on the basis of Eurocentrism alone occludes the generalized anti-refugee sentiment, or the generalized view of refugees as a problem, which influenced the shape and character of the 1951 convention. As this essay will demonstrate, the Eurocentric nature of the convention was partly the result of an effort to make the so-called ‘refugee problem’ more manageable, though as a solution it ultimately exacerbated other issues. The tensions inherent in the convention’s approach became clear in 2015 when a record 1.3 million refugees sought asylum in Europe. States and opponents resisted this movement by
{"title":"Eurocentrism and the International Refugee Regime","authors":"L. Madokoro","doi":"10.1177/16118944221077423","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16118944221077423","url":null,"abstract":"As refugees know, and scholars have demonstrated, there are many ways in which the international refugee regime is Eurocentric. This includes legal definitions of refugeehood, mental maps of who is a refugee, ideas about where refugees come from, and who takes the responsibility for receiving and caring for refugees. In the fields of Refugee Studies and Critical Refugee Studies there exists a robust literature on the question of Eurocentrism, particularly as regards the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, recognized as the cornerstone of the contemporary international refugee regime. There are many valid critiques. Yet the tendency to condemn existing practices on the basis of Eurocentrism alone occludes the generalized anti-refugee sentiment, or the generalized view of refugees as a problem, which influenced the shape and character of the 1951 convention. As this essay will demonstrate, the Eurocentric nature of the convention was partly the result of an effort to make the so-called ‘refugee problem’ more manageable, though as a solution it ultimately exacerbated other issues. The tensions inherent in the convention’s approach became clear in 2015 when a record 1.3 million refugees sought asylum in Europe. States and opponents resisted this movement by","PeriodicalId":44275,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern European History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41603285","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01DOI: 10.1177/16118944221077407
Jakob Schönhagen
Amira hatte wenig Grund zur Hoffnung. Im Jahr 2015 war sie eine von vielen, eine Frau mit Kind wie ein Viertel der weltweit 65 Millionen Flüchtlinge. Ihre syrische Heimatstadt Homs war im Bürgerkrieg zerstört worden. Was 2011 als Teil des arabischen Frühlings begonnen hatte, spitzte sich in Syrien innerhalb weniger Jahre in einer verheerenden Spirale der Gewalt zu. Bis heute sind dem Syrienkrieg 600.000 Menschen zum Opfer gefallen, bis 2015 verließen zehn Millionen Syrerinnen und Syrer ihre Heimat, die Hälfte der Bevölkerung. So floh auch Amira. Sie konnte nicht wieder zurück und hatte keine Aussicht auf ein internationales Resettlement, also eine Neuansiedlung in einem Drittstatt. Im Jahr des großen Exodus aus Syrien erhielt nur 1 Prozent aller Flüchtlinge weltweit die Möglichkeit, sich in Drittstaaten niederzulassen. Mit ihrer Tochter hätte sie in Lagern an der Grenze zu Syrien Zuflucht suchen können, so wie 9 Prozent der Flüchtlinge. Diese lebten von Ration zu Ration und konnten die Camps nicht frei verlassen. An eine Selbstversorgung war nicht zu denken. Amira hätte sich auch der Mehrheit der syrischen Flüchtlinge anschließen können: Drei Viertel von ihnen tauchten in den Großstädten der Nachbarländer unter. Ohne Arbeitsund Aufenthaltserlaubnis wären allerdings auch hier die Aussichten auf ein einigermaßen selbstbestimmtes Leben begrenzt gewesen. Amira beschloss deshalb, die gefährliche Reise über das Mittelmeer nach Griechenland und von dort über die Balkanroute nach Zentraleuropa zu wagen—so wie rund eine Million syrischer Flüchtlinge. Auch Wuli war einer von vielen. Er floh 1988 als 18-Jähriger aus Somaliland, als sich die Kämpfe zwischen den Sezessionisten und dem somalischen Militär zuspitzten: Auf die Unabhängigkeitsbewegung reagierte das somalische Militär mit scharfen Repressionsmaßnahmen und breitflächigen Bombardements. 50.000 Menschen starben, 400.000 flohen innerhalb des Landes, 400.000 über die Grenzen in Flüchtlingslager in Äthiopien oder Dschibuti. So wie Wuli. Bis heute lebt er in einem Lager in Dschibuti. Das Camp liegt isoliert in einer unwirtlichen
{"title":"2015 einordnen. Historische Perspektiven auf ein bewegtes Jahr. Einleitung","authors":"Jakob Schönhagen","doi":"10.1177/16118944221077407","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16118944221077407","url":null,"abstract":"Amira hatte wenig Grund zur Hoffnung. Im Jahr 2015 war sie eine von vielen, eine Frau mit Kind wie ein Viertel der weltweit 65 Millionen Flüchtlinge. Ihre syrische Heimatstadt Homs war im Bürgerkrieg zerstört worden. Was 2011 als Teil des arabischen Frühlings begonnen hatte, spitzte sich in Syrien innerhalb weniger Jahre in einer verheerenden Spirale der Gewalt zu. Bis heute sind dem Syrienkrieg 600.000 Menschen zum Opfer gefallen, bis 2015 verließen zehn Millionen Syrerinnen und Syrer ihre Heimat, die Hälfte der Bevölkerung. So floh auch Amira. Sie konnte nicht wieder zurück und hatte keine Aussicht auf ein internationales Resettlement, also eine Neuansiedlung in einem Drittstatt. Im Jahr des großen Exodus aus Syrien erhielt nur 1 Prozent aller Flüchtlinge weltweit die Möglichkeit, sich in Drittstaaten niederzulassen. Mit ihrer Tochter hätte sie in Lagern an der Grenze zu Syrien Zuflucht suchen können, so wie 9 Prozent der Flüchtlinge. Diese lebten von Ration zu Ration und konnten die Camps nicht frei verlassen. An eine Selbstversorgung war nicht zu denken. Amira hätte sich auch der Mehrheit der syrischen Flüchtlinge anschließen können: Drei Viertel von ihnen tauchten in den Großstädten der Nachbarländer unter. Ohne Arbeitsund Aufenthaltserlaubnis wären allerdings auch hier die Aussichten auf ein einigermaßen selbstbestimmtes Leben begrenzt gewesen. Amira beschloss deshalb, die gefährliche Reise über das Mittelmeer nach Griechenland und von dort über die Balkanroute nach Zentraleuropa zu wagen—so wie rund eine Million syrischer Flüchtlinge. Auch Wuli war einer von vielen. Er floh 1988 als 18-Jähriger aus Somaliland, als sich die Kämpfe zwischen den Sezessionisten und dem somalischen Militär zuspitzten: Auf die Unabhängigkeitsbewegung reagierte das somalische Militär mit scharfen Repressionsmaßnahmen und breitflächigen Bombardements. 50.000 Menschen starben, 400.000 flohen innerhalb des Landes, 400.000 über die Grenzen in Flüchtlingslager in Äthiopien oder Dschibuti. So wie Wuli. Bis heute lebt er in einem Lager in Dschibuti. Das Camp liegt isoliert in einer unwirtlichen","PeriodicalId":44275,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern European History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45852670","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01DOI: 10.1177/16118944221077419
Agnes Bresselau von Bressensdorf
‘Refugees welcome!’ In September 2015, pictures of crowds of asylum-seekers arriving at Munich’s central railway station were broadcasted around the world. The message that this image conveyed suggested an open-minded Germany, awakening memories of the autumn of 1989 when thousands of people from the German Democratic Republic flooded into the West. This time, however, the migrants were largely displaced people fleeing Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. They had trekked through the so-called ‘Balkan Route’ to the Hungarian border and, for humanitarian reasons, the West German government had agreed to take them in. However, the influx of refugees grew rapidly, and the initial warm reception shown in Munich and other German cities soon gave way to anxious debate and controversy. Was the German and European asylum system being overwhelmed? Were there sufficient strategies in place to integrate these newcomers? Comparisons were made both with the problem of integrating displaced persons following the end of World War II and with the rise in the number of asylum-seekers in the early 1990s. Yet one crucial aspect has so far been neglected: a critical-historical look at the entanglements of global, transnational and regional developments in the 1970s and the 1980s. The way Europe deals with refugees and humanitarianism today cannot be properly analysed without an understanding of these years. Since the mid-1970s, most regional and global refugee movements came from the countries of the ‘Global South’. These states were experiencing wars of independence and mass expulsions of peoples in the wake of decolonisation, in proxy wars in the Cold War confrontation or in Central American civil wars. Above all, after the war in Vietnam, it was the exodus of hundreds of
{"title":"Refugees as a ‘World Order’ Concern: (Western) Europe and the Middle East since the 1980s","authors":"Agnes Bresselau von Bressensdorf","doi":"10.1177/16118944221077419","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16118944221077419","url":null,"abstract":"‘Refugees welcome!’ In September 2015, pictures of crowds of asylum-seekers arriving at Munich’s central railway station were broadcasted around the world. The message that this image conveyed suggested an open-minded Germany, awakening memories of the autumn of 1989 when thousands of people from the German Democratic Republic flooded into the West. This time, however, the migrants were largely displaced people fleeing Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. They had trekked through the so-called ‘Balkan Route’ to the Hungarian border and, for humanitarian reasons, the West German government had agreed to take them in. However, the influx of refugees grew rapidly, and the initial warm reception shown in Munich and other German cities soon gave way to anxious debate and controversy. Was the German and European asylum system being overwhelmed? Were there sufficient strategies in place to integrate these newcomers? Comparisons were made both with the problem of integrating displaced persons following the end of World War II and with the rise in the number of asylum-seekers in the early 1990s. Yet one crucial aspect has so far been neglected: a critical-historical look at the entanglements of global, transnational and regional developments in the 1970s and the 1980s. The way Europe deals with refugees and humanitarianism today cannot be properly analysed without an understanding of these years. Since the mid-1970s, most regional and global refugee movements came from the countries of the ‘Global South’. These states were experiencing wars of independence and mass expulsions of peoples in the wake of decolonisation, in proxy wars in the Cold War confrontation or in Central American civil wars. Above all, after the war in Vietnam, it was the exodus of hundreds of","PeriodicalId":44275,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern European History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46193567","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01DOI: 10.1177/16118944221077413
Daniel Thym
In den heißen Monaten der Flüchtlingskrise wurde das europäische Asylrecht vielfach als Begrenzung nationalstaatlicher Handlungsbefugnisse empfunden. Zaghaft rechtfertigte der deutsche Innenminister de Maizière die unterlassene Grenzschließung mit dem Hinweis, dass das deutsche Recht “in vielerlei Hinsicht vom europäischen überlagert” werde. Es schien, als ob humanitäre EU-Vorgaben die Bundesregierung am entschlossenen Handeln im nationalen Interesse hinderten. In der historischen Genese, rechtlichen Bewertung sowie aktuellen Ausprägung ist die Situation freilich komplexer, als es die verbreitete Chiffre von der “europäischen Lösung” als Inbegriff einer humanitären Willkommenskultur suggeriert. “Europa” diente immer auch als Instrument, um die Asylzuwanderung effektiv zu steuern.
{"title":"Europäische Zuständigkeitsregeln für Asylverfahren: Intentionale Externalisierung und unbeabsichtigte Pfadabhängigkeit","authors":"Daniel Thym","doi":"10.1177/16118944221077413","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16118944221077413","url":null,"abstract":"In den heißen Monaten der Flüchtlingskrise wurde das europäische Asylrecht vielfach als Begrenzung nationalstaatlicher Handlungsbefugnisse empfunden. Zaghaft rechtfertigte der deutsche Innenminister de Maizière die unterlassene Grenzschließung mit dem Hinweis, dass das deutsche Recht “in vielerlei Hinsicht vom europäischen überlagert” werde. Es schien, als ob humanitäre EU-Vorgaben die Bundesregierung am entschlossenen Handeln im nationalen Interesse hinderten. In der historischen Genese, rechtlichen Bewertung sowie aktuellen Ausprägung ist die Situation freilich komplexer, als es die verbreitete Chiffre von der “europäischen Lösung” als Inbegriff einer humanitären Willkommenskultur suggeriert. “Europa” diente immer auch als Instrument, um die Asylzuwanderung effektiv zu steuern.","PeriodicalId":44275,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern European History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48924924","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01DOI: 10.1177/16118944221077411
Jochen Oltmer
AmAnfang stand ein recht simples Instrument, umGrenzen neu zu ziehen: Das Visum ermöglicht die Auslagerung von Grenzkontrollen auf das Territorium anderer Staaten. Konsulate der Transitund Ankunftsländer kategorisieren Intention und Merkmale einer potentiell mobilen Person bereits vor einer Durchoder Einreise und legen Reisebedingungen (Zeitpunkt, Dauer, Sicherheitsleistungen) fest. Menschen können abgewiesen werden, ehe sie aufgrund des Eintreffens an einer Grenze und des Betretens eines Territoriums Rechte auf Prüfung eines Einreisebzw. Asylgesuchs erwerben. Damit verhindert ein Staat auch, dass Grenzgänger:innen womöglich vor Ort Unterstützung für einen Bleibewunsch durch Grenzbeamte, Rechtsbeistände, Mitreisende, Verwandte oder Bekannte finden. Materielle und immaterielle Kosten einer Abweisung an der Grenze bzw. einer Ausweisung oder Abschiebung vom Territorium lassen sich, so das Kalkül in den Transitund Ankunftsstaaten, vermeiden: keine Aufwendungen für den Rücktransport, keine mentalen Belastungen für Beschäftigte von Grenzschutz und Polizei, keine Konflikte mit Hilfsorganisationen und Staaten, in die oder durch die rückgeführt wird. Die folgenden Bemerkungen ordnen die Fluchtverhältnisse der 2010er Jahren in eine längere Linie der Externalisierung von Grenzkontrollen im „langen“ 20. Jahrhundert ein, das vom Ende des Ersten Weltkriegs bis in die Gegenwart reicht. Auf diese Weise soll es erstens gelingen, Einblicke in die Mechanismen und Funktionen der Infrastrukturen zur Kontrolle und Steuerung von Migration zu gewinnen. Zweitens wird die Frage verfolgt, warum trotz einer ausgeprägten Externalisierungspolitik der Europäischen Union (EU) seit den 1990er Jahren die Zahl der Asylsuchenden in Europa von 2011 bis 2016 erheblich anstieg.
{"title":"Die Fluchtbewegungen „2015“ im Jahrhundert der Externalisierung","authors":"Jochen Oltmer","doi":"10.1177/16118944221077411","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16118944221077411","url":null,"abstract":"AmAnfang stand ein recht simples Instrument, umGrenzen neu zu ziehen: Das Visum ermöglicht die Auslagerung von Grenzkontrollen auf das Territorium anderer Staaten. Konsulate der Transitund Ankunftsländer kategorisieren Intention und Merkmale einer potentiell mobilen Person bereits vor einer Durchoder Einreise und legen Reisebedingungen (Zeitpunkt, Dauer, Sicherheitsleistungen) fest. Menschen können abgewiesen werden, ehe sie aufgrund des Eintreffens an einer Grenze und des Betretens eines Territoriums Rechte auf Prüfung eines Einreisebzw. Asylgesuchs erwerben. Damit verhindert ein Staat auch, dass Grenzgänger:innen womöglich vor Ort Unterstützung für einen Bleibewunsch durch Grenzbeamte, Rechtsbeistände, Mitreisende, Verwandte oder Bekannte finden. Materielle und immaterielle Kosten einer Abweisung an der Grenze bzw. einer Ausweisung oder Abschiebung vom Territorium lassen sich, so das Kalkül in den Transitund Ankunftsstaaten, vermeiden: keine Aufwendungen für den Rücktransport, keine mentalen Belastungen für Beschäftigte von Grenzschutz und Polizei, keine Konflikte mit Hilfsorganisationen und Staaten, in die oder durch die rückgeführt wird. Die folgenden Bemerkungen ordnen die Fluchtverhältnisse der 2010er Jahren in eine längere Linie der Externalisierung von Grenzkontrollen im „langen“ 20. Jahrhundert ein, das vom Ende des Ersten Weltkriegs bis in die Gegenwart reicht. Auf diese Weise soll es erstens gelingen, Einblicke in die Mechanismen und Funktionen der Infrastrukturen zur Kontrolle und Steuerung von Migration zu gewinnen. Zweitens wird die Frage verfolgt, warum trotz einer ausgeprägten Externalisierungspolitik der Europäischen Union (EU) seit den 1990er Jahren die Zahl der Asylsuchenden in Europa von 2011 bis 2016 erheblich anstieg.","PeriodicalId":44275,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern European History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42238420","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：