DOCSLIB.ORG

British-Romanian Relations, 1944-65

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
British-Romanian Relations, 1944-65 BRITISH-ROMANIAN RELATIONS 1944-65 Mark Landon Percival,BA, MA. Thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London University, School of Slavonic and East European Studies March 1997 Supervisors: Prof. Dennis Deletant Dr Maurice Pearton ProQuest Number: 10055359 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest. ProQuest 10055359 Published by ProQuest LLC(2016). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 DEDICATION This thesis is dedicated to Dr Martyn Rady and Bojana Asanovic for exceptional friendship, moral support and sound academic advice. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am particularly grateful to Professor Laszlo Peter (School of Slavonic and East European Studies) for valuable written and oral information clarifying C. A. Macartney's views on the Romanian- Hungarian frontier question, and Roderick Braithewaite, who I interviewed. Tony Benn MP kindly sent me uncut extracts from his diaries referring to Romania. Nick Cross, Archivist of the Harlequins Rugby Club supplied me with information on the team's visit to Romania in 1956. Professors Robert Service and Robert Pynsent have given helpful advice. I would also like to thank my supervisors. Professor Dennis Deletant and Dr Maurice Pearton for their help in the preparation of this thesis. On a personal level I am especially grateful to Claire Byers for her friendship and support and likewise to all my friends and former colleagues at Hughes Parry Hall, London. 4 ABSTRACT Throughout the period 1944-65, Britain confined itself to protecting its direct interests in Romania and these were fairly narrowly defined. Moreover, relations with Romania were always dominated by wider considerations of foreign policy and the state of the domestic economy. Thus from 1944 to 1948, they were determined by London's desire firstly to maintain the Anglo- Soviet alliance against Hitler and afterwards to achieve a post-war modus-vivendi with Moscow which would preserve British influence in the Mediterranean. British policy makers were therefore keen to avoid any East-West tension over political developments in Romania. While there was some British interest in resuming trade, possibilities were severely constrained by Soviet economic domination of the country. Romanian expropriation without compensation of British commercial assets in 1948, together with the regime's failure to honour pre-war debts and wartime damages obligations provided an irritant to British-Romanian trading relations, which was only partly resolved by the 1960 trade arrangement and payments agreement. This accord was the result of increased interest by both Britain and Romania in bilateral trade from the late 1950s, when Bucharest's industrialisation programme created opportunities for British companies and the climate of East-West relations improved. The period 1956-60 was the most promising one in British-Romanian relations. However, the related problems of Romania's bilateralist approach to trade and Britain's strict quotas on Romanian agricultural exports prevented the 1960 accord from having any major effect in expanding commercial exchanges between the two countries in the long term. Britain was unwilling to grant trade concessions to Romania for political reasons when Bucharest began to demonstrate some independence of Moscow in the 1960s. Thus, in spite of Romania’s dispute with Moscow, by 1965 it was clear that there were limits to the possibilities for the development of British-Romanian relations. CONTENTS PAGE NOTE ON PRIMARY SOURCES AND ROMANIAN SPELLING 7 CHAPTER 1: Introduction 9 CHAPTER 2: The Romanian Percentage. (1944-45) 33 CHAPTER 3: Britain and the Groza Government. 77 (1945-47) CHAPTER 4: Britain and the Hungarian-Romanian Frontier 122 Settlement. (1944-47) CHAPTER 5: Britain, the Romanian "Historic” Parties and the 148 Monarchy. (1944-47) CHAPTER 6: The most subservient satellite. Britain's vain 175 attempt to reassert its interests. (1948-56) CHAPTER 7: The Khrushchev thaw. Possibilities for 216 normalisation of relations. (1956-60) CHAPTER 8: Political Development and Economic 253 Disappointment. (1961-2) CHAPTER 9: The limits of relations established. (1963-65) 283 CHAPTER 10: Conclusion. 332 BIBLIOGRAPHY 346 NOTE ON PRIMARY SOURCES AND ROMANIAN SPELLING The bulk of the research for this study, which mainly concerns diplomatic history, has been carried out at the Public Record Office, Kew Gardens. Most of the material concerning Romania is to be found in Foreign Office papers, although there are also a number of Board of Trade files with relevant information on the late 1940s and early 1960s. There are no files on Romania in this category for the 1950s, although a number of general documents concerning British trade policy towards the Eastern Bloc in this decade have yielded relevant information. A number of Prime Minister's and Cabinet Office papers have material which helps an understanding of British-Romanian relations, particularly concerning policy in 1944. Some War Office files exist on the work of the British Military Mission in Romania, but these deal with administrative matters concerning, for instance, travel arrangements and the political communications of the Mission are to be found in the Foreign Office papers. Extensive written and oral enquiries have led to the conclusion that there are no further documents relevant to Romania on the Treasury or MAFF files nor on the Board of Trade files for the 1950s. Thus the official material on British-Romanian relations has been treated comprehensively.1 ) The Public Record Office also contains the private papers of Sir Orme Sargent, Sir Archibald Clark Kerr and Anthony Eden (on microfilm), which have yielded information on British-Romanian relations. Other private collections at the Churchill Archive Centre, Cambridge and the Bodleian Library Oxford have also proved useful, while the BBC archive at Caversham contains material which adds to the picture provided 8 by government papers. Since this study concerns British- Romanian relations rather than exclusively British policy, a number of archives connected with non-government relations have proved relevant, notably that of the Labour Party in Manchester, Lambeth Palace and the State and Foreign Ministry Archives in Bucharest, Romania. In 1953, the Soviet-imposed Romanian communist dictatorship introduced changes to the spelling of certain words in the Romanian language in order to make it appear more Slavonic and less Latin. This was a demonstration of the domination which Moscow exercised over Romania at the time. In 1965, these changes were partially revoked by Nicolae Ceaujescu and in 1993 completely revoked by the Romanian Academy. For reasons of consistency the pre-1953 and post 1993 spellings are used throughout. 1) Correspondence from Dr Andrew Macdonald, Twentieth Century specialist. Public Record Office, February 1997. CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION The Romanian coup of 23 August 1944 was a major turning point in the country’s history. On that date, the regime of Marshal Antonescu, who had brought his country into the war on Germany’s side, was overthrown and the country changed to fighting on the Allied side. The coup marks an obvious watershed in British-Romanian relations, since the two countries were no longer actively at war (even though the formal peace treaty was not signed until 1947). Consequently, 23 August 1944 marks the starting point of this research. However, in order to understand British-Romanian relations in the aftermath of Romania’s change of sides in the war, a number of generalities concerning British- Romanian and British-Soviet relations from 1941 need to be considered. In June of that year, Romania entered the war on the German side against the Soviet Union, which became an ally of Britain. From that point onwards, British policy towards Romania became merely a subsidiary of that towards the Soviet Union. Romania was now an enemy and the Soviet Union an important ally in the war against Hitler. It was recognised as counter productive to carry out military or political operations in Romania if these Jeopardised the Soviet alliance. It was also logical that at an early stage Britain should tacitly accept Soviet war aims with regard to Romania, which clearly included the reincorporation of Bessarabia and the Northern Bukovina, even though the annexation of the two regions had not been recognised in 1940.1) Britain’s concessions to Soviet ambitions in Eastern Europe during the war should be seen in the context of the military situation. Contrary to official British wartime propaganda designed I 0 to maintain morale, the Anglo-Soviet wartime relationship was far from easy.2) There had been distrust between the two countries since the Russian Revolution in 1917. Britain had attempted to crush the Bolshevik regime by its support for the White forces in the civil war in 1918-19, a policy which Churchill had strongly favoured.3) In the inter-war period, some British politicians had regarded the Soviet doctrine of world revolution, and the implication that subversion would be used to overthrow Western governments, as a greater threat to the security of the UK and its Empire than a resurgent Germany. This distrust appeared well founded when in spite of the efforts of Britain and France in the late summer of 1939 to woo Moscow into joining the anti-German camp, the Soviets combined with Berlin (their supposed ideological enemy) in a carve up of territory under the Molotov- Ribbentropp Pact. The USSR’s annexation of Polish territory under the Pact was a challenge to Britain’s March 1939 guarantee to the latter country, the violation of which by Germany had been a casus belli.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sistemul Internaţional Şi Politica Puterilor Minore
    ŞCOALA NAŢIONALĂ DE STUDII POLITICE ŞI ADMINISTRATIVE TEZĂ DE DOCTORAT: SISTEMUL INTERNAŢIONAL ŞI POLITICA PUTERILOR MINORE. CAZUL ROMÂNIEI, 1913-1989 COORDONATOR: DOCTORAND: Prof. Univ. Dr. Mihail E. Ionescu Asist. Univ. Andrei Miroiu BUCUREŞTI, 2004 1 PARTEA I-A PUTERILE MINORE ÎN POLITICA INTERNAŢIONALĂ Această teză de doctorat reprezintă un demers realist de a înţelege comportamentul unei puteri minore, România, în raport cu propriul subsistem al relaţiilor internaţionale. Voi încerca, pe de o parte, să critic teoriile realiste actuale care tratează problematica puterilor minore şi să alcătuiesc o viziune contextualizată pentru principalul obiectiv al cercetării. Pe de altă parte, voi încerca să înţeleg comportamentul României ca actor internaţional axându-mă pe cele mai relevante teste din punctul de vedere al perspectivelor realiste: deciziile privind conflictul militar şi poziţia în sistemele de alianţe. Propria viziune asupra modului în care se structurează politica puterilor minore pornind de la constângerile sistemului internaţional, anunţată în prima parte a tezei, va fi testată în cele două părţi ale lucrării care vizează problematica românească. A doua parte a tezei va viza comportamentul României în momentele deciziilor esenţiale pentru supravieţuirea sau mărirea unui stat, cele privind acceptarea sau neacceptarea conflictului militar, din puctul de vedere al disputei teoretice legate de acţiunile de balansare şi de aliniere. A treia secţiune va încerca, bazându-se pe principiile analizei strategice şi ale analizei diplomatice să înţeleagă rolul României într-un cadru al hegemoniei de pace, determinat de plasarea în blocul estic între 1945 şi 1989-1991. Războiul interstatal a fost perceput în literatura clasică a relaţiilor internaţionale drept fenomenul central al oricărei investigaţii generatoare de teorii în 2 domeniul politicii mondiale1.
    [Show full text]
  • Doc 1 2010 Tipar.Indd
    studii/documente MESAJUL ŞEFULUI STATULUI MAJOR GENERAL CU OCAZIA SĂRBĂTORIRII ZILEI SERVICIULUI ISTORIC AL ARMATEI iua Serviciului Istoric al Armatei, sărbătorită în fi ecare an la 17 martie, constituie pentru comunitatea Z militară şi civilă deopotrivă prilejul de a-i omagia pe toţi cei care, de peste paisprezece decenii, au contribuit la conservarea şi valorifi carea pe plan ştiinţifi c a testimoniilor arhivistice ale Armatei României, tezaur spiritual destinat să păstreze pentru posteritate mărturiile documentare privind rolul şi locul în societatea românească, evoluţia şi tradiţiile organismului militar naţional, precum şi faptele de arme, bravura şi spiritul de jertfă ale militarilor români. În urmă cu 143 de ani, Înaltul Decret nr. 380 din 17 martie 1867 a consfinţit înfiinţarea „Depozitului General al Războiului”, cu statut de direcţie a Ministerului de Război, care avea în compunere Secţia Lucrări istorice. Această structură indispensabilă, cu atribuţii privind clasarea și conservarea arhivelor militare, studierea documentelor de arhivă, elaborarea de lucrări referitoare la istoria Armatei României, coordonarea activităţii bibliotecilor militare și studierea organizării armatelor străine a constituit nucleul unei instituţii cu responsabilităţi și sarcini specifice în gestionarea tradiţiilor militare, care se regăsește în structura tuturor armatelor statelor membre NATO. De-a lungul timpului, Serviciul Istoric al Armatei României a asigurat un management efi cient al zecilor de mii de unităţi arhivistice care s-au acumulat în depozitele specializate, concomitent cu derularea unui proces salutar de valorifi care a lecţiilor trecutului prin elaborarea de lucrări ştiinţifi ce – culegeri de documente, cronologii, monografi i, dicţionare, albume şi enciclopedii – care refl ectă cu acurateţe şi obiectivitate un parcurs glorios şi o evoluţie constant ascendentă a organismului militar românesc.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Operations Executive - Wikipedia
    12/23/2018 Special Operations Executive - Wikipedia Special Operations Executive The Special Operations Executive (SOE) was a British World War II Special Operations Executive organisation. It was officially formed on 22 July 1940 under Minister of Economic Warfare Hugh Dalton, from the amalgamation of three existing Active 22 July 1940 – 15 secret organisations. Its purpose was to conduct espionage, sabotage and January 1946 reconnaissance in occupied Europe (and later, also in occupied Southeast Asia) Country United against the Axis powers, and to aid local resistance movements. Kingdom Allegiance Allies One of the organisations from which SOE was created was also involved in the formation of the Auxiliary Units, a top secret "stay-behind" resistance Role Espionage; organisation, which would have been activated in the event of a German irregular warfare invasion of Britain. (especially sabotage and Few people were aware of SOE's existence. Those who were part of it or liaised raiding operations); with it are sometimes referred to as the "Baker Street Irregulars", after the special location of its London headquarters. It was also known as "Churchill's Secret reconnaissance. Army" or the "Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare". Its various branches, and Size Approximately sometimes the organisation as a whole, were concealed for security purposes 13,000 behind names such as the "Joint Technical Board" or the "Inter-Service Nickname(s) The Baker Street Research Bureau", or fictitious branches of the Air Ministry, Admiralty or War Irregulars Office. Churchill's Secret SOE operated in all territories occupied or attacked by the Axis forces, except Army where demarcation lines were agreed with Britain's principal Allies (the United Ministry of States and the Soviet Union).
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Anglo-Turkish Relations, Volume 2, Number 1, January 2021 Boşcan, Liliana Elena
    Journal of Anglo-Turkish Relations, Volume 2, Number 1, January 2021 Boşcan, Liliana Elena. “Activity of the Special Operation Executive in Romania via Turkey, 1943 – 1944”, Journal of Anglo-Turkish Relations, Vol. 2, No. 1, (January 2021), pp. 11-23. Activity of the Special Operation Executive in Romania via Turkey, 1943 - 1944 Liliana Elena Boșcan1 Abstract The Anschluss of March 1938 marks the point at which Hitler’s designs for Europe became clearer to Britain and greater prominence was given to considerations about Romania. Between 1938 and 1941 Britain’s only weapon against German ambitions in countries which fell into Hitler’s orbit were military subversive operations — the destruction of the oilfields and the interdiction of supply routes by the Danube and the rail network — but S.O.E. ((Special Operation Executive) failed. Between 1941 and 1944, the S.O.E. (Special Operation Executive) activity was centred on the revival of wireless contacts with Iuliu Maniu, head of the National Peasant Party, aimed at persuading through him Marshal Ion Antonescu to abandon the Axis and the provision of a channel of communication of armistice terms by the Allies (Autonomous Mission, December 1943). The S.O.E. has taken steps to create a reliable communication channel between S.O.E. residents in Istanbul and Bucharest. A network was made through Turkey legations or through emissaries sent to Istanbul, Ankara and Cairo, or by radio broadcast and by agents launched with parachute. Keywords: S.O.E., Romanian-Turkish Relations, Oil, Balkans, World War II 1. Introduction In April 1938, Admiral Sir Hugh Sinclair, the Head of the British Secret Intelligence Service (S.I.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 'The Left's Views on Israel: from the Establishment of the Jewish State To
    ‘The Left’s Views on Israel: From the establishment of the Jewish state to the intifada’ Thesis submitted by June Edmunds for PhD examination at the London School of Economics and Political Science 1 UMI Number: U615796 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U615796 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 F 7377 POLITI 58^S8i ABSTRACT The British left has confronted a dilemma in forming its attitude towards Israel in the postwar period. The establishment of the Jewish state seemed to force people on the left to choose between competing nationalisms - Israeli, Arab and later, Palestinian. Over time, a number of key developments sharpened the dilemma. My central focus is the evolution of thinking about Israel and the Middle East in the British Labour Party. I examine four critical periods: the creation of Israel in 1948; the Suez war in 1956; the Arab-Israeli war of 1967 and the 1980s, covering mainly the Israeli invasion of Lebanon but also the intifada. In each case, entrenched attitudes were called into question and longer-term shifts were triggered in the aftermath.
    [Show full text]
  • Jews Control U.S.A., Therefore the World – Is That a Good Thing?
    Jews Control U.S.A., Therefore the World – Is That a Good Thing? By Chairman of the U.S. based Romanian National Vanguard©2007 www.ronatvan.com v. 1.6 1 INDEX 1. Are Jews satanic? 1.1 What The Talmud Rules About Christians 1.2 Foes Destroyed During the Purim Feast 1.3 The Shocking "Kol Nidre" Oath 1.4 The Bar Mitzvah - A Pledge to The Jewish Race 1.5 Jewish Genocide over Armenian People 1.6 The Satanic Bible 1.7 Other Examples 2. Are Jews the “Chosen People” or the real “Israel”? 2.1 Who are the “Chosen People”? 2.2 God & Jesus quotes about race mixing and globalization 3. Are they “eternally persecuted people”? 3.1 Crypto-Judaism 4. Is Judeo-Christianity a healthy “alliance”? 4.1 The “Jesus was a Jew” Hoax 4.2 The "Judeo - Christian" Hoax 4.3 Judaism's Secret Book - The Talmud 5. Are Christian sects Jewish creations? Are they affecting Christianity? 5.1 Biblical Quotes about the sects , the Jews and about the results of them working together. 6. “Anti-Semitism” shield & weapon is making Jews, Gods! 7. Is the “Holocaust” a dirty Jewish LIE? 7.1 The Famous 66 Questions & Answers about the Holocaust 8. Jews control “Anti-Hate”, “Human Rights” & Degraded organizations??? 8.1 Just a small part of the full list: CULTURAL/ETHNIC 8.2 "HATE", GENOCIDE, ETC. 8.3 POLITICS 8.4 WOMEN/FAMILY/SEX/GENDER ISSUES 8.5 LAW, RIGHTS GROUPS 8.6 UNIONS, OCCUPATION ORGANIZATIONS, ACADEMIA, ETC. 2 8.7 IMMIGRATION 9. Money Collecting, Israel Aids, Kosher Tax and other Money Related Methods 9.1 Forced payment 9.2 Israel “Aids” 9.3 Kosher Taxes 9.4 Other ways for Jews to make money 10.
    [Show full text]
  • DREPTATEA V R E M E a V R E M U I E Ş
    „LUMINEAZÄ-TE Şl VEI FI : VOIEŞTE ŞI VEI PUTEA". C. A. ROSETTI Director : ANUL VII, Nr. 213 şl 214 Generalul NICOLAE PETALA REDACŢIA, STR. REGALĂ No. 16. CRĂCIUNUL ANULUI 1927 ADMINISTRAŢIA STR. REGALA No.16 BUCUREŞTI Apare în flecare Duminică DREPTATEA Constatări dureroase Vremea vremuieşte Şi se lasă iarăşi nemărgi­ nită linişte în sufletele noas­ După 10 ani de Ia înfăptuirea Foarte des am stat de — N'au avut nevoie, căci ţele acoperite cu stuh ori tre. Este zi de sărbătoare. visului şi aspiraţiunei strămoşilor vorbă cu sătenii despre nou­ nu le-au cunoscut, unche­ paie Şi cu oişte ferestrici Se prăznueşte din nou naş­ glorioşi, reîntregirea poporului ro­ terea mântuitorului nostru tăţile şi născocirile pe care şule. cât pumnul, în care nu-ţi mânesc în vechile-i hotare „Dacia", putei vâri decât nasul. A- Isus Christos. Este minunat când nu numai ţăranul român dar le-au adus şi le aduc vre­ — Şi vrai să spui că, prilej de reculegere—Şi ne şi cel minoritar, a devenii pro­ necunoscându-le, a u fost cu ma se clădesc în sate case întrebăm întru sfârşit de murile nouă; şi de cele de prietarul pământului, pe care îna­ mai puţin fericiţi decât voi ? încăpătoare, bine acoperite, taina mântuirei adusă de isus. inte îi Iura ca slugă, iobag ori mai multe ori i-am găsii, bine luminate. Vra să zică — Nu vreau să spun asia, Dreptatea este dorinţa ar­ clacaş, este dureros, amar de du­ mal ales pe cei bâfrant, în­ acem rău că nu trăim în- uncheşule, căci fericirea ne zătoare a omenirei în mersul reros, tânguitorul refren car'l au­ dărătniciţi in cele apucate vizunie ca cei dedemult? ei către mai bins.
    [Show full text]
  • American and British Reactions to Mexico's Expropriation of Foreign Oil Properties, 1937-1943
    THE DIPLOMACY OF EXPROPRIATION: AMERICAN AND BRITISH REACTIONS TO MEXICO'S EXPROPRIATION OF FOREIGN OIL PROPERTIES, 1937-1943 Catherine E. Jayne Submitted for the Degree of Ph.D., Arts Department of International History London School of Economics University of London November 1997 UMI Number: U111299 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U111299 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 ^<3 32 S191 H S3S: 2 ABSTRACT On 18 March 1938 Mexican labour problems in the oil industry culminated in Mexican President Ldzaro Cdrdenas' decision to expropriate the holdings of 17 American, Dutch and British oil companies.^ The purpose of this thesis is to fill the gaps in the literature on the Mexican oil nationalisation by analyzing the policies of the oil companies, and comparing and analyzing in detail how policy was determined in both Britain and the United States at a time when Britain was trying to win US cooperation in the face of increasing hostilities in Europe and the Far East. While Whitehall wanted US cooperation in taking a firm stance against Mexico, Washington refused.
    [Show full text]
  • Enlarging the European Union This Page Intentionally Left Blank Enlarging the European Union the Commission Seeking Influence, 1961–1973
    Enlarging the European Union This page intentionally left blank Enlarging the European Union The Commission Seeking Influence, 1961–1973 Michael J. Geary Assistant Professor, Maastricht University, The Netherlands Global Europe Fellow, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC © Michael J. Geary 2013 Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 2013 978-0-230-30280-8 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission. No portion of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or under the terms of any licence permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency, Saffron House, 6–10 Kirby Street, London EC1N 8TS. Any person who does any unauthorized act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages. The author has asserted his right to be identified as the author of this work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. First published 2013 by PALGRAVE MACMILLAN Palgrave Macmillan in the UK is an imprint of Macmillan Publishers Limited, registered in England, company number 785998, of Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS. Palgrave Macmillan in the US is a division of St Martin’s Press LLC, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010. Palgrave Macmillan is the global academic imprint of the above companies and has companies and representatives throughout the world. Palgrave® and Macmillan® are registered trademarks in the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe and other countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Romanians of the French Resistance
    French History, Vol. 28, No. 4 (2014) doi:10.1093/fh/cru080 Advance Access publication 10 October 2014 ROMANIANS OF THE FRENCH RESISTANCE GAVIn BOWD* Downloaded from Robert Guédiguian’s film L’Armée du crime and Didier Daeninckx’s novel Missak have been recent reminders of the role of immigrants in the French Resistance. The fate of the ‘Groupe Manouchian’, twenty-two men and one woman executed in early 1944 (they were used in the Nazi propaganda campaign L’Affiche rouge), still resonates and provokes controversy, raising the issue of the silence which http://fh.oxfordjournals.org/ has often surrounded the place of foreigners in la France résistante. What is more, it raises the wider issues of the fate of many of the surviving résistants in post-war communist Eastern Europe and the potential conflicts between inter- nationalism, nationalism and ethnicity. This article seeks to address such issues by examining the largely overlooked involvement of Romanians in the French Resistance, and the significant role they played—well beyond their numerical strength—in both the struggle against the German Occupier and in the post- at University of North Dakota on June 5, 2015 war communist regime. If this could be seen as yet another example of l’amitié franco-roumaine—those strong political and cultural bonds that made of Bucharest a ‘petit Paris’ and of the French capital a place of pilgrimage and ref- uge—it also reveals a complex and sometimes tragic entanglement. An event such as l’Affaire Manouchian is rightly cited as an example of the ‘Vichy Syndrome’ described by Henry Rousso, where a nation’s reassur- ing self-image is shattered by the unbearable reminder of ‘la guerre franco- française’.1 But this resurgence of a past that ‘will not pass’ goes beyond the strictly national frame.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of HM Embassy in Washington
    The Role of HM Embassy in Washington edited by Gillian Staerck and Michael D. Kandiah ICBH Witness Seminar Programme The Role of HM Embassy in Washington ICBH Witness Seminar Programme Programme Director: Dr Michael D. Kandiah © Institute of Contemporary British History, 2002 All rights reserved. This material is made available for use for personal research and study. We give per- mission for the entire files to be downloaded to your computer for such personal use only. For reproduction or further distribution of all or part of the file (except as constitutes fair dealing), permission must be sought from ICBH. Published by Institute of Contemporary British History Institute of Historical Research School of Advanced Study University of London Malet St London WC1E 7HU ISBN: 1 871348 83 8 The Role of HM Embassy in Washington Held 18 June 1997 in the Map Room, Foreign & Commonwealth Office Chaired by Lord Wright of Richmond Seminar edited by Gillian Staerck and Michael D. Kandiah Institute of Contemporary British History Contents Contributors 9 Citation Guidance 11 The Role of HM Embassy in Washington 13 edited by Gillian Staerck and Michael D. Kandiah Contributors Editors: GILLIAN STAERCK Institute of Contemporary British History DR MICHAEL KANDIAH Institute of Contemporary British History Chair: LORD WRIGHT OF Private Secretary to Ambassador and later First Secretary, Brit- RICHMOND ish Embassy, Washington 1960-65, and Permanent Under-Sec- retary and Head of Diplomatic Service, FCO 1986-91. Paper-giver DR MICHAEL F HOPKINS Liverpool Hope University College. Witnesses: SIR ANTONY ACLAND GCMG, GCVO. British Ambassador, Washington 1986-91. PROFESSOR KATHLEEN University College, University of London.
    [Show full text]
  • BRITISH HUMANITARIAN Ngos and the DISASTER RELIEF INDUSTRY, 1942-1985
    BRITISH HUMANITARIAN NGOs AND THE DISASTER RELIEF INDUSTRY, 1942-1985 By ANDREW JONES A thesis submitted to The University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of History School of History and Cultures College of Arts and Law The University of Birmingham April 2014 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. Abstract This thesis is a history of humanitarian non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in Britain, between 1942 and 1985. Specifically, it is focused upon the group of leading agencies linked to the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC), an umbrella body for joint emergency fundraising established in the 1960s. The thesis explores the role of these NGOs in building up an expansive and technocratic disaster relief industry in Britain, in which they were embedded as instruments for the delivery of humanitarian aid. This was problematic, as many principal aid agencies also wished to move away from short-term disaster relief, to focus upon political advocacy connected to international development instead. It is argued that, despite this increasing political focus, humanitarian NGOs were consistently brought back to emergency relief by the power of television, the lack of public support for development, and the interventions of the British government.
    [Show full text]