DOCSLIB.ORG

Norwegian Extraterritoriality in China

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Norwegian Extraterritoriality in China Norwegian Extraterritoriality in China A study of how and why Norway abolished its extraterritoriality in China. HIS 350 Jens Tepstad Master Thesis in History Department of Archeology, History, Cultural- and Religious Studies University of Bergen November 2015 His 350 Jens Tepstad i Preface One of the issues that comes to mind when mentioning "Sino-Norwegian relations" today, is the recent disagreement between the two countries regarding the granting of the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize to the Chinese human rights activist Liu Xiaobo. China reacted by holding the Norwegian government responsible for the Peace Price Committee's decision to award the price to an individual the Chinese government deemed to be both a criminal and a troublemaker. Norway is however, far from the only country that have criticized the Chinese government on humanitarian grounds. The United States has continuously pressed for a halt in the Chinese government’s practice of arresting activists, limiting religious practices within the country and blocking access to websites deemed inappropriate. However, it is not only in recent times that the West has considered its own principles to be universally applicable and attempted to impose them on non-Western countries like China. Nearly two centuries ago normative disagreements led to foreign states enjoying "extraterritoriality” in China over a period of roughly one hundred years. Even though Norway was not characterized neither by colonialism nor imperialism, it was still one of the states that attained extraterritoriality for its citizens in China. After exploring the issues surrounding foreign extraterritoriality in China, I decided that this was the topic I wanted to investigate in my master thesis. This topic is exciting and important for two reasons. Firstly, Norwegian extraterritoriality in China is a topic to which not much academic attention has been devoted. Secondly, the scholars who have researched extraterritoriality have primarily focused on the relationship between the Western great powers and China; and mainly on the relations between Great Britain and China. This makes it interesting to explore how a small nation like Norway positioned itself in these affairs. Hence I decided to study the Norwegian participation in the abolition-process that ultimately ended Norwegian extraterritoriality in China. I want to express my thanks to all who have helped and supported me in my study. First and foremost I would like to thank my supervisor Camilla Brautaset for her commitment and guidance throughout the whole process. I would also like to express my gratitude to His 350 Jens Tepstad ii Christhard Hoffmann and all the others in the seminar “På tvers av grenser” (Across international borders) who have provided me with helpful and constructive criticism throughout the writing process. I will also express my sincere gratitude to all who have helped me by proofreading my text. And finally I would like to express my sincere thanks to the project: “Merchants and Missionaries” for a scholarship, in addition to important support for my work. This is a project that researches Norwegian encounters with China in a transnational perspective, 1890–1937, which is hosted by the Department of AHKR and funded by the Norwegian Research Council (Project Number 205553). His 350 Jens Tepstad iii Table of Contents Norwegian Extraterritoriality in China .............................................................................................. i Preface .............................................................................................................................................. ii Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ iv The International Landscape in East Asia during the Early 1920s ................................................ viii Chapter I ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Thesis Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 The Topic ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Research Question and Methodological Framework ........................................................... 6 1.2.1 Delimitation of Time ...................................................................................................... 7 1.2.2 Clarifications Regarding the Terms used in this Research ............................................. 8 1.2.3 Clarifications on old Colonial names of Asian Cites and Countries ............................... 9 1.3 Literature and Research Status ............................................................................................. 9 1.3.1 Specialist Studies Regarding Extraterritoriality ........................................................... 10 1.3.2 Research Literature on China and the Wider World ................................................... 13 1.3.3 Studies of the History of Norwegian Diplomacy and Foreign Policy ........................... 14 1.4. Approaching the Sources .................................................................................................... 15 1.5 Primary Sources ................................................................................................................... 16 1.5.1 Who were the Norwegian diplomats that wrote these letters? ................................. 18 1.5.2 Diplomatic Correspondence as Primary Sources ......................................................... 21 1.5.3 Newspapers as Primary Sources .................................................................................. 23 1.5.4 Unused Sources ............................................................................................................ 24 1.6 Thesis Structure ................................................................................................................... 25 Chapter II ........................................................................................................................................ 26 Five Contexts for Norwegian Extraterritoriality ............................................................................. 26 2.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 26 2.2 The Most Favored Nation Agreement................................................................................. 26 2.3 The Norwegian Neutrality Policy ......................................................................................... 28 His 350 Jens Tepstad iv 2.4 The Qing dynasty’s encounter with International Society .................................................. 31 2.5 The Political Situation in China after the fall of the Qing .................................................... 32 2.5.1 The Era of the Warlords ............................................................................................... 33 2.6 The Washington Naval Conference and Its Outcome ......................................................... 35 Chapter III ....................................................................................................................................... 39 Responses to the Washington Naval Conference .......................................................................... 39 3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 39 3.2 Different views on Extraterritoriality in China .................................................................... 40 3.3 The Norwegian Diplomats’ Responses to the Resolution ................................................... 41 3.3.1 “The Standard of Civilization” ...................................................................................... 43 3.3.2 The Response from the Norwegian diplomats ............................................................ 44 3.3.3 No Guarantee for Basic Rights ..................................................................................... 47 3.3.4 An Inefficient Bureaucracy ........................................................................................... 48 3.3.5 Adherence to International Law and an Effective Legal System ................................. 50 3.3.6 The Maintenance of Diplomatic Relations................................................................... 52 3.3.7 The Compliance with Western Norms and Values ...................................................... 54 3.4 Chapter Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 55 Chapter IV ....................................................................................................................................... 56 The Potential Adherence to the Eight-Power Resolution .............................................................. 56 4.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 56 4.2 Opening Remarks ................................................................................................................ 57 4.3 The Norwegian Status Seeking ...........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Biopolitics and Geopolitics of Border Enforcement in Melilla
    The biopolitics and geopolitics of border enforcement in Melilla By: Corey Johnson and Reece Johnson Johnson, C., & Jones, R. (2018). The biopolitics and geopolitics of border enforcement in Melilla. Territory, Politics, Governance 6(1), 61-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2016.1236746 This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Territory, Politics, Governance on 06 October 2016, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/21622671.2016.1236746. ***© 2016 Regional Studies Association. Reprinted with permission. No further reproduction is authorized without written permission from Taylor & Francis. This version of the document is not the version of record. Figures and/or pictures may be missing from this format of the document. *** Abstract: This article uses the multiple and contradictory realities of Melilla, a pene-enclave and -exclave of Spain in North Africa, to draw out the contemporary practice of Spanish, European Union, and Moroccan immigration enforcement policies. The city is many things at once: a piece of Europe in North Africa and a symbol of Spain’s colonial history; an example of the contemporary narrative of a cosmopolitan and multicultural Europe; a place where extraterritorial and intraterritorial dynamics demonstrate territory’s continuing allure despite the security challenges and the lack of economic or strategic value; a metaphorical island of contrasting geopolitical and biopolitical practices; and a place of regional flows and cross-border cooperation between Spain, the EU, and Morocco. It is a border where the immunitary logic of sovereign territorial spaces is exposed through the biopolitical practices of the state to ‘protect’ the community from outsiders.
    [Show full text]
  • The Extraterritorial Application of American Law
    THE EXTRATERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF AMERICAN LAW: MYTHS AND REALITIES Laurent Cohen-Tanugi February 2015 THE EXTRATERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF AMERICAN LAW: MYTHS AND REALITIES Table of Contents Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................1 I. Extraterritoriality and International Law ......................................................................................2 Extraterritoriality: What Is It All About? .........................................................................................2 The Specificities of American Law ..................................................................................................5 II. Transatlantic Convergence ...........................................................................................................6 The Limitation of Extraterritorial Enforcement in the United States ...............................................7 The Expansion of the Extraterritorial Projection of European Law ...............................................11 III. An Effective Catalyst of the Internationalization of Law ..........................................................15 Extraterritoriality and Globalization ...............................................................................................15 American Leadership in International Economic Law Enforcement .............................................16 From Confrontation to Cooperation ...............................................................................................18
    [Show full text]
  • Extended CFP: Special Territorial Status and Extraterritoriality, Longyearbyen Svalbard, January 20-24 2019
    H-Sport Extended CFP: Special Territorial Status and Extraterritoriality, Longyearbyen Svalbard, January 20-24 2019 Discussion published by Zachary T. Androus on Friday, September 7, 2018 Dear Colleagues, Island Dynamics is now accepting proposal submissions for the interdisciplinary conference Special Territorial Status and Extraterritoriality: Exceptional Sovereignties and Sovereign Exceptions, to be held in Longyearbyen, Svalbard, January 20-24, 2019, the world's only visa- free zone and its northernmost inhabited territory. In addition to an engaging conference program, delegates will also be able to enjoy a dogsled excursion into the polar night and a guided visit to a historical Russian mining operation. The deadline for proposing a presentation is September 30, 2018. To submit a proposal and for registration information, please visit www.islanddynamics.org/extraterritoriality2019.html. While sport is not mentioned specifically in the call, the topic intersects with sport practices in a number of important ways and proposals addressing any of them are welcome. Call for Proposals: Territorially based sovereign states are commonly presented as the basic, fundamental units of the international political world system, and they clearly represent powerful, even dominant, forces in global institutions of governance. But the world is also replete with myriad cases that defy the presumed logic of state sovereignty as the elemental operating unit of the global political system. Certain contexts for extraterritorial legal jurisdiction over individuals or places, and the corresponding immunity from local laws, are well-established in international relations practice regarding diplomatic and military installations and personnel. Extraterritoriality can be conceptually expanded to effectively address a range of other ways in which particular territories, institutions, and individuals are subject to exceptional forms of political, legal, and existential status.
    [Show full text]
  • The United Nations As a Permanent World Organization
    THE UNITED NATIONS AS A PERMANENT WORLD ORGANIZATION By ERIK COLBAN Former Norvegian Ambassador to the United Kingdom. Even those of us, who stille are young, have lived in the time of the Yeague of Nations. We know that that attempt to create a lasting world organization for peace and friendly collaboration be- tween the peoples did not succeed. We now have the United Nations. Is there a prospect that this new attempt, with the same purpose, will prove more capable of surviving? To clear our minds on this question we should begin by con- sidering on general lines the tasks of the organization. We shall then be in a better position to see, how it must be constructed so as to be able. to perform these tasks and survive. The tasks are two-fold: political and non-political. Two world - wars made it natural to place the political task - to secure peace in the foreground both in the Covenant of the League of Nations and in the Charter of the United Nations. But both documents gave also the organization the task to solve economic, social, cultural and humanitarian problems. Let us first examine the political task: consideration and settle- ment of international disputes. On this subject the system embodied in the Charter of the United Nations is in general the same as that of the Covenant of the League of Nations: the Member States undertake to stand one for all and all for one against the State which violates the peace. The system failed in the days of the League, because the States which violated the peace were Great Powers and because the United States of America remained outside the orga- nization.
    [Show full text]
  • The Holy See (Including Vatican City State)
    COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS ON THE EVALUATION OF ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING MEASURES AND THE FINANCING OF TERRORISM (MONEYVAL) MONEYVAL(2012)17 Mutual Evaluation Report Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism THE HOLY SEE (INCLUDING VATICAN CITY STATE) 4 July 2012 The Holy See (including Vatican City State) is evaluated by MONEYVAL pursuant to Resolution CM/Res(2011)5 of the Committee of Ministers of 6 April 2011. This evaluation was conducted by MONEYVAL and the report was adopted as a third round mutual evaluation report at its 39 th Plenary (Strasbourg, 2-6 July 2012). © [2012] Committee of experts on the evaluation of anti-money laundering measures and the financing of terrorism (MONEYVAL). All rights reserved. Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged, save where otherwise stated. For any use for commercial purposes, no part of this publication may be translated, reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic (CD-Rom, Internet, etc) or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage or retrieval system without prior permission in writing from the MONEYVAL Secretariat, Directorate General of Human Rights and Rule of Law, Council of Europe (F-67075 Strasbourg or [email protected] ). 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PREFACE AND SCOPE OF EVALUATION............................................................................................ 5 II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Introduction
    Notes 1 Introduction 1. Donald Macintyre, Narvik (London: Evans, 1959), p. 15. 2. See Olav Riste, The Neutral Ally: Norway’s Relations with Belligerent Powers in the First World War (London: Allen and Unwin, 1965). 3. Reflections of the C-in-C Navy on the Outbreak of War, 3 September 1939, The Fuehrer Conferences on Naval Affairs, 1939–45 (Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1990), pp. 37–38. 4. Report of the C-in-C Navy to the Fuehrer, 10 October 1939, in ibid. p. 47. 5. Report of the C-in-C Navy to the Fuehrer, 8 December 1939, Minutes of a Conference with Herr Hauglin and Herr Quisling on 11 December 1939 and Report of the C-in-C Navy, 12 December 1939 in ibid. pp. 63–67. 6. MGFA, Nichols Bohemia, n 172/14, H. W. Schmidt to Admiral Bohemia, 31 January 1955 cited by Francois Kersaudy, Norway, 1940 (London: Arrow, 1990), p. 42. 7. See Andrew Lambert, ‘Seapower 1939–40: Churchill and the Strategic Origins of the Battle of the Atlantic, Journal of Strategic Studies, vol. 17, no. 1 (1994), pp. 86–108. 8. For the importance of Swedish iron ore see Thomas Munch-Petersen, The Strategy of Phoney War (Stockholm: Militärhistoriska Förlaget, 1981). 9. Churchill, The Second World War, I, p. 463. 10. See Richard Wiggan, Hunt the Altmark (London: Hale, 1982). 11. TMI, Tome XV, Déposition de l’amiral Raeder, 17 May 1946 cited by Kersaudy, p. 44. 12. Kersaudy, p. 81. 13. Johannes Andenæs, Olav Riste and Magne Skodvin, Norway and the Second World War (Oslo: Aschehoug, 1966), p.
    [Show full text]
  • NORWAY AND. the WAR · September 1.939 - December 1940
    DOCUMENTS ON -INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS . NORWAY AND. THE WAR · September 1.939 - December 1940. The Royal IMtitute of International .Affairs is an unofficial and non-political body, founded in 1920 to encourage and facilitate the seientifie study of international affairs. The Institute, as sueh, is precluded by its Royal Charter from expressing any opinion on any aspect of international affairs. .Any opinioM that may be expressed in this book on sueh subjects are not, therefore, the views of the Institute. DOCUMENTS ON INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS NORWAY AND THE WAR September 1939 December 1940 EDITED BY MONICA CURTIS OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS LONDON NEW YORK TORONTO 188Ved under the av.spicu of the Royal. li!Mil!IU of lntenlldioltal AJ!airB 1941 OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS A..ME.N ROUSE, E.C. 4 LONDON l!DilfBUI!.GH GLASGOW OW YORK !I:OBOIITO IIELBOUI!.l!fB CAPETOWN BOIIBAY CALCUTTA IIADBAS HUMPHREY MILFORD PUBLISIIEB TO TBE U!HVEBSITY PBINTKD 11'1 GBE&T DBl'r&Il'l PREFATORY NOTE OWING to war conditions it has not. been possible to publish the complete annual volumes of the Documents on International Affairs as ea:rly as usual. It has therefore been thought desirable to issue a separate advance publication relating to Norway and the War. This publication is to be regarded as forming part of the regular series of Documents on International Affairs and is conceived on the same lines. The fact that it has been compiled during the war nevertheless makes certain differences. Certain texts which it would be desirable to publish, especially those emanating from enemy or enemy-occupied countries, are not available, or can be found only in newspapers instead of in the more official form which would normally be used.
    [Show full text]
  • Making the Palace Machine Work Palace Machine the Making
    11 ASIAN HISTORY Siebert, (eds) & Ko Chen Making the Machine Palace Work Edited by Martina Siebert, Kai Jun Chen, and Dorothy Ko Making the Palace Machine Work Mobilizing People, Objects, and Nature in the Qing Empire Making the Palace Machine Work Asian History The aim of the series is to offer a forum for writers of monographs and occasionally anthologies on Asian history. The series focuses on cultural and historical studies of politics and intellectual ideas and crosscuts the disciplines of history, political science, sociology and cultural studies. Series Editor Hans Hågerdal, Linnaeus University, Sweden Editorial Board Roger Greatrex, Lund University David Henley, Leiden University Ariel Lopez, University of the Philippines Angela Schottenhammer, University of Salzburg Deborah Sutton, Lancaster University Making the Palace Machine Work Mobilizing People, Objects, and Nature in the Qing Empire Edited by Martina Siebert, Kai Jun Chen, and Dorothy Ko Amsterdam University Press Cover illustration: Artful adaptation of a section of the 1750 Complete Map of Beijing of the Qianlong Era (Qianlong Beijing quantu 乾隆北京全圖) showing the Imperial Household Department by Martina Siebert based on the digital copy from the Digital Silk Road project (http://dsr.nii.ac.jp/toyobunko/II-11-D-802, vol. 8, leaf 7) Cover design: Coördesign, Leiden Lay-out: Crius Group, Hulshout isbn 978 94 6372 035 9 e-isbn 978 90 4855 322 8 (pdf) doi 10.5117/9789463720359 nur 692 Creative Commons License CC BY NC ND (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0) The authors / Amsterdam University Press B.V., Amsterdam 2021 Some rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, any part of this book may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise).
    [Show full text]
  • Gustav Smedals Klipparkiv
    Gustav Smedals klipparkiv Juristen Gustav Smedal (1888-1951) var en profilert person i det polare miljøet i Norge før krigen, og han involverte seg spesielt i Grønlandssaken på 1920- og 1930-tallet Arkivet består av avisutklipp innsamlet av Smedal selv Norsk Polarinstitutt Biblioteket Innledning Klipparkivet er på omtrent fem hyllemeter, sortert i bokser. Boksene inneholder mapper organisert av Gustav Smedal selv, inndelt i tema og ofte på dato. Klippene kommer i hovedsak norske aviser, men arkivet består også av utklipp fra nordisk og internasjonal presse. Enkelte tema er mye mer omfattende enn andre siden særlig Grønlandsspørsmål opptok Smedal. Likevel er det en stor spennvidde i arkivet fra norsk innenrikspolitikk til dansk kolonipolitikk, fra Arktis og Antarktis til strid om grensen mellom Danmark og Tyskland for å nevne noen. Hver enkel mappe er indeksert i listen under. Biblioteket kan i enkelte tilfeller tilby seg å kopiere innholdet i ønskede mapper. Der det finnes større mengder materiale lar dette seg dessverre ikke gjøre. Alle interesserte er imidlertid velkomne til å besøke biblioteket i Tromsø for nærmere studier. Tilleggsinformasjon utover Smedals egne notater er ført inn i parentes. Dette er i enkelte tilfeller gjort for å beskrive saker og personer. Boks 1 1. Det østgrønlandske suverenitetsspørsmål I Herunder Ishavsrådets offentliggjørelse av en henvendelse til Regjeringen av 5. mai 1931 og okkupasjonen av Eirik Raudes Land 1. januar – 21. mai 1931 2. Det østgrønlandske suverenitetsspørsmål II 30. mai – 29. juni 1931 Boks 2 3. Det østgrønlandske suverenitetsspørsmål III 30. juni – 4. juli 1931 4. Det østgrønlandske suverenitetsspørsmål IV 5. juli – 11. juli 1931 Boks 3 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Extraterritoriality
    DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAW EXTRATERRITORIALITY “The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.” Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350 (2006). “We assume that Congress legislates against the backdrop of the pre- sumption against extraterritoriality.” EEOC v. Arabian Am. Oil Co., 499 U.S. 244, 248 (1991). “[T]he number of U.S. lawsuits where American laws are applied extraterritorially to solve global problems has grown. This trend, how- ever, is not peculiar to the United States. Increasingly other countries are also applying their laws extraterritorially to exert international in- fluence and solve transboundary challenges.” Austen L. Parrish, Reclaiming International Law from Extraterritoriality, 93 MINN. L. REV. 815, 818 (2009) (footnote omitted). “The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner incon- sistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” U.N. Charter art. 2, paras. 1, 4. 1226 2011] DEVELOPMENTS — EXTRATERRITORIALITY 1227 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1228 II. IMPLICATIONS OF EXTRATERRITORIALITY IN THE ALIEN TORT STATUTE .... 1233 A. Introduction ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Scandinavian Journal of History, 44(4), 454-483
    Coversheet This is the accepted manuscript (post-print version) of the article. Contentwise, the accepted manuscript version is identical to the final published version, but there may be differences in typography and layout. How to cite this publication Please cite the final published version: Gram-Skjoldager, K., Ikonomou, H., & Kahlert, T. (2019). Scandinavians and the League of Nations Secretariat, 1919-1946. Scandinavian Journal of History, 44(4), 454-483. https://doi.org/10.1080/03468755.2019.1566170 Publication metadata Title: Scandinavians and the League of Nations Secretariat, 1919-1946 Author(s): Karen Gram-Skjoldager, Haakon A. Ikonomou & Torsten Kahlert Journal: Scandinavian Journal of History DOI/Link: 10.1080/03468755.2019.1566170 Document version: Accepted manuscript (post-print) General Rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognize and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. If the document is published under a Creative Commons license, this applies instead of the general rights. This coversheet template is made available by AU Library Version 2.0, December 2017 Scandinavians and the League of Nations Secretariat, 1919-1946 Karen Gram-Skjoldager, Haakon A.
    [Show full text]
  • FABRICATING FIDELITY: NATION-BUILDING, INTERNATIONAL LAW, and the GREEK-TURKISH POPULATION EXCHANGE by Umut Özsu a Thesis
    FABRICATING FIDELITY: NATION-BUILDING, INTERNATIONAL LAW, AND THE GREEK-TURKISH POPULATION EXCHANGE by Umut Özsu A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Juridical Sciences Faculty of Law University of Toronto © Copyright by Umut Özsu (2011) Abstract FABRICATING FIDELITY: NATION-BUILDING, INTERNATIONAL LAW, AND THE GREEK-TURKISH POPULATION EXCHANGE Umut Özsu Doctor of Juridical Sciences (S.J.D.) Faculty of Law University of Toronto 2011 This dissertation concerns a crucial episode in the international legal history of nation-building: the Greek-Turkish population exchange. Supported by Athens and Ankara, and implemented largely by the League of Nations, the population exchange showcased the new pragmatism of the post-1919 order, an increased willingness to adapt legal doctrine to local conditions. It also exemplified a new mode of non-military nation-building, one initially designed for sovereign but politico-economically weak states on the semi-periphery of the international legal order. The chief aim here, I argue, was not to organize plebiscites, channel self-determination claims, or install protective mechanisms for vulnerable minorities Ŕ all familiar features of the Allied Powers‟ management of imperial disintegration in central and eastern Europe after the First World War. Nor was the objective to restructure a given economy and society from top to bottom, generating an entirely new legal order in the process; this had often been the case with colonialism in Asia and Africa, and would characterize much of the mandates system ii throughout the interwar years. Instead, the goal was to deploy a unique mechanism Ŕ not entirely in conformity with European practice, but also distinct from non-European governance regimes Ŕ to reshape the demographic composition of Greece and Turkey.
    [Show full text]