DOCSLIB.ORG

British-Romanian Relations During the Cold War

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
British-Romanian Relations During the Cold War Western University Scholarship@Western Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository 11-22-2013 12:00 AM British-Romanian Relations during the Cold War Mihaela Sitariu The University of Western Ontario Supervisor Professor Brock Millman The University of Western Ontario Graduate Program in History A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree in Doctor of Philosophy © Mihaela Sitariu 2013 Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd Part of the Diplomatic History Commons, and the European History Commons Recommended Citation Sitariu, Mihaela, "British-Romanian Relations during the Cold War" (2013). Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. 1862. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/1862 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Western. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Western. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BRITISH –ROMANIAN RELATIONS DURING THE COLD WAR Thesis format: Monograph By Mihaela Sitariu Graduate Program in History A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The School of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada @Mihaela Sitariu, 2013 Abstract In the aftermath of the Second World War, towards the end of the 1940s, British- Romanian relations were strained, marked by accusations of espionage directed towards Britain’s diplomats and requests for recalls. The British Government reacted moderately, acquiescing to recall their diplomats but refusing to concede to the Romanians when it came to their ‘flimsy’ accusations. Negotiation was preferred to reprisals especially when certain Britons had to be rescued from the Communists’ hands. In one respect Britain was not that indulgent: when money was involved, particularly the assets of oil companies nationalized in 1948. Trade remained a priority for both the British and Romanian governments. After laborious negotiations, a trade agreement was signed in 1960 and the ascendant trend continued into the 1970s when Harold Wilson and Nicolae Ceausescu established a close relationship. Britain’s interest in Romania was defined at this juncture as being firstly political, then mercantile and cultural, in order of priority. As far as Romania remained a ‘thorn’ in the Soviet Union’s back, a means to reach the remote Chinese or a mediator between various sides of the world in conflict, politics was priority. Trade remained an issue for both parties. Anglo- Romanian cultural relations however, were almost nonexistent for the duration of this period. Concern for human rights, Helsinki agreements notwithstanding, focused entirely on the predicament of a few persons who wished to marry or to reunite with their family in Britain. When political interest in Romania declined in the 1980s, due to the regime’s eleventh hour attempt to reconnect to the Eastern Bloc, Britain’s economic interest still remained. Relations between Britain and Ceausescu’ Romania remained strong until the Revolution of 1989 that swept away Ceausescu and the Communist regime. ii At the close of the decade, Romania's foreign and domestic policies were fiercely criticized by the Soviet Union’s more liberal Communist leader, Gorbachev. Although the “value” of Romanian deviance within the communist camp seemed to be diminishing in importance during the 1980s, Ceausescu’s fall was as big a surprise to London as it was to himself. Although Ceausescu’s policies of national assertion abroad, and promises, censorship and repression inside, had produced a seemingly a stable state, neither Ceausescu nor London, had grasped that a changing Eastern Europe would challenge even the existence of a complicated balancing act between the West and East which culminated with the disappearance of the Soviet led organizations and the Soviet Bloc. Once renowned for an assertive foreign policy, Romania was again in the spot of world at the end of 1989, this time for having executed its dictator and bloodily ending a regime. iii To Professor Neville Thompson iv Table of Contents Abstract .............................ii-iii Acknowledgements ................................vi Introduction ...........................1-16 1.’We still have 10 percent’ .........................17-39 2. ‘To go to war for Romania?’ ......................40-62 3. Supporting the Communist regime? ........................63-87 4. Spies everywhere .....................88-112 5. The Romanian thaw .....................113-138 6. Divergent aims: detainees’ release versus cultural exchanges .....................139-161 7. Looking at Romania through the wrong end of the telescope ..................162-194 8. Romania singled out ........................195-221 9. Britain’s interests in Ceausescu’s Romania ...................... 222-241 10. The Queen’s guests ......................242-266 Epilogue .......................267-270 Conclusion .......................271-279 Bibliography ........................280- 286 Appendix ..........................287 Curriculum Vitae ...........................288 v Acknowledgements I was fortunate to have met during my studies at the University of Western Ontario wonderful professors. Professor Neville Thompson was a genuine mentor, always encouraging and helpful. The dissertation is dedicated to him. I am grateful to my supervisor, Professor Brock Millman, who helped me to clarify my ideas, read every word of my dissertation, often several times, and gave me much needed advice. I have learnt much from Professors J. Rodney Millard, Pierre Claude Reynard and William J. Turkell and received much encouragement from Professor Roger D. Hall. I am also grateful to Silviu Moldovan from the National Council for Studying the Securitate Files and Stelian Obiziuc from the Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs who guided my research in the files of their institutions. A number of friends have given me advice and help. I am indebted to Radu Neamtu and Cosmin Florescu who supported me in various occasions during my studies. Neil and Chris Speed offered me their warm hospitality during my stay in London in May 2013. My friends Nicolae Videnie and Mircea Stanescu offered me advice and kindly located various books for me. vi Introduction This dissertation grew out of a paper which I presented in a seminar held by Professor Neville Thomson on British history. After reading my paper my colleagues were interested to find out more about Ceausescu and his foreign policy. My presentation had focused on British-Romanian relations in the mid-Cold War: the sixties and seventies. “How was Ceausescu perceived today”, my colleagues wanted to know. Is he still considered a ruthless dictator or is he praised for his stance during the Czechoslovak crisis when he condemned the Soviet led invasion by the Warsaw Pact countries in which Romania did not take part? To many people Romania was and still is a remote country whose relations with Britain were not of much interest. To many Romanians, Britain still represents the country of Churchill -- the ‘betrayer who sold us at Yalta’ -- and a country where it is good to go to work, particularly given high currency valuations. The eldest may recall that, in their youth, they had watched on TV the great pomp of Ceausescu’s visit to London and most of them would remember that the Queen took Ceausescu into her carriage. Only some would know that it was the first State visit by a Communist leader to Britain since the War and very few might draw a connection between Ceausescu’s stance of 1968 and his subsequent state visit to Britain of 1978. In the aftermath of the Second World War Romania was not of much interest for Britain. Churchill ‘never felt’ that Britain’s relations with Romania in the past ‘called for any special sacrifice’ from Britons. 1 Although changing sides on 23 August 1944, Romania was still a former Axis power. 1 Churchill, The Second World War, II, Their Finest Hour, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1940, p. 208. 1 At the beginning of the Second World War Romania’s leaders adopted a policy of cautious neutrality and King Carol II looked to Britain to help offset the developing hegemony of Germany. In 1939 the Foreign Office conceived a plan by which military assistance could be given to Romania in case of a German attack. This implied an intention to form a bloc of states in Eastern Europe which would be able to provide direct military aid to Romania in case of attack. 2 Following a request for economic assistance, on 20 March 1939 the Foreign Office announced that it would send a trade mission to Bucharest. The mission arrived at the end of April and had the purpose of granting of five million pounds in credit and the promise to purchase two hundred thousand tons of Romanian wheat from the next harvest. 3 In order to gain a free hand against Poland, Hitler made important concessions to the Soviets, including the recognition of Bessarabia as a Russian asset. Following the secret additional protocol to the Non-Aggression Pact of 23 August 1939 signed by Ribbentrop and Molotov, the Soviets invaded Bessarabia and Bukovina. In a Foreign Office memorandum of 5 September 1939 Orme Sargent stated that it was in Britain’s ‘vital interest’ to strengthen Romania. 4 This remained however just an intention. Romania led by General Ion Antonescu joined the Anti-Comintern Pact and six months later, on 22 June 1941 declared war on the Soviet Union. The Romanians would soon find themselves engaged in war with the Soviets’ allies without wanting it. Britain declared war on Romania on 7 December, followed by the United States on 12 December 1941. 5 2 Paul D. Quinlan, Clash Over Romania. British and American policies toward Romania: 1938- 1947, American Romanian Academy of Arts and Sciences, Los Angeles, 1977, p. 42. 3 Ibid,, p. 46. 4 Ibid., pp. 49-50. 5 Nicolae Ciachir, Marile Puteri si Romania, 1856-1947 [The Great Powers and Romania, 1856- 1947] , p. 296 and 303-305. 2 On 23 August 1944 the King Michael arrested Antonescu and announced the unilateral cessation of hostilities with the Soviets.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Trials of the War Criminals
    TRIALS OF THE WAR CRIMINALS General Considerations The Fascist regime that ruled Romania between September 14, 1940, and August 23, 1944, was brought to justice in Bucharest in May 1946, and after a short trial, its principal leaders—Ion and Mihai Antonescu and two of their closest assistants—were executed, while others were sentenced to life imprisonment or long terms of detention. At that time, the trial’s verdicts seemed inevitable, as they indeed do today, derived inexorably from the defendants’ decisions and actions. The People’s Tribunals functioned for a short time only. They were disbanded on June 28, 1946,1 although some of the sentences were not pronounced until sometime later. Some 2,700 cases of suspected war criminals were examined by a commission formed of “public prosecutors,”2 but only in about half of the examined cases did the commission find sufficient evidence to prosecute, and only 668 were sentenced, many in absentia.3 There were two tribunals, one in Bucharest and one in Cluj. It is worth mentioning that the Bucharest tribunal sentenced only 187 people.4 The rest were sentenced by the tribunal in Cluj. One must also note that, in general, harsher sentences were pronounced by the Cluj tribunal (set up on June 22, 1 Marcel-Dumitru Ciucă, “Introducere” in Procesul maresalului Antonescu (Bucharest: Saeculum and Europa Nova, 1995-98), vol. 1: p. 33. 2 The public prosecutors were named by communist Minister of Justice Lucret iu Pătrăşcanu and most, if not all of them were loyal party members, some of whom were also Jews.
    [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]
  • Romania Redivivus
    alexander clapp ROMANIA REDIVIVUS nce the badlands of neoliberal Europe, Romania has become its bustling frontier. A post-communist mafia state that was cast to the bottom of the European heap by opinion- makers sixteen years ago is now billed as the success story Oof eu expansion.1 Its growth rate at nearly 6 per cent is the highest on the continent, albeit boosted by fiscal largesse.2 In Bucharest more politicians have been put in jail for corruption over the past decade than have been convicted in the rest of Eastern Europe put together. Romania causes Brussels and Berlin almost none of the headaches inflicted by the Visegrád Group—Czechia, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia— which in 1993 declined to accept Romania as a peer and collectively entered the European Union three years before it. Romanians con- sistently rank among the most Europhile people in the Union.3 An anti-eu party has never appeared on a Romanian ballot, much less in the parliament. Scattered political appeals to unsavoury interwar traditions—Legionnairism, Greater Romanianism—attract fewer voters than do far-right movements across most of Western Europe. The two million Magyars of Transylvania, one of Europe’s largest minorities, have become a model for inter-ethnic relations after a time when the park benches of Cluj were gilded in the Romanian tricolore to remind every- one where they were. Indeed, perhaps the aptest symbol of Romania’s place in Europe today is the man who sits in the Presidential Palace of Cotroceni in Bucharest. Klaus Iohannis—a former physics teacher at a high school in Sibiu, once Hermannstadt—is an ethnic German head- ing a state that, a generation ago, was shipping hundreds of thousands of its ‘Saxons’ ‘back’ to Bonn at 4,000–10,000 Deutschmarks a head.
    [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]
  • Protocol No. 5 of the Meeting of the Executive Committee of the CC of the RCP, on the Situation in Czechoslovakia
    Parallel History Project on NATO and the Warsaw Pact (PHP) April 2004 Romania and the Warsaw Pact, 1955–1989 www.isn.ethz.ch/php Edited by Dennis Deletant, Mihail E. Ionescu and Anna Locher ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Protocol No. 5 of the Meeting of the Executive Committee of the CC of the RCP, on the Situation in Czechoslovakia Bucharest, 21 August 1968 Participants in the meeting, comrades: Nicolae Ceasescu, Ion Gheorghe Maurer, Gheorghe Apostol, Alexandru Bârladeanu, Emil Bodnaras, Chivu Stoica, Paul Niculescu-Mizil, Virgil Trofin, Ilie Verdet, Maxim Berghianu, Florian Danalache, Constantin Dragan, Ianos Fazekas, Leonte Rautu, Vasile Vâlcu, Stefan Voitec, Iosif Banc, Petre Blajovici, Dumitru Coliu, Mihai Gere, Petre Lupu, Manea Manescu, Dumitru Popa, Dumitru Popescu, Gheorghe Stoica. Invited to participate in the meeting, comrades: Mihai Dalea, Vasile Patilinet. The meeting opens at 6:30 a.m. AGENDA: The situation created after the penetration of the armed forces of certain socialist countries into the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic. Upon listening to Comrade Nicolae Ceausescu's briefing on the very serious situation created after the penetration in the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic - without the knowledge and approval of that country's Party and State bodies, of the armed forces of the URSS, the Polish People's Republic, the Hungarian People's Republic, the People's Republic of Bulgaria and the German Democratic Republic - the Executive Committee of the CC of the RCP, decides as follows: • The Government of the Socialist Republic of Romania shall address a note to the five socialist countries whose troops occupied Czechoslovakia and express its concern about and disapproval of this act, the fact that it does not share at all the views stated in the TASS Communiqué, alleging that a counter-revolutionary situation was obtaining in Czechoslovakia which might have justified a military intervention.
    [Show full text]
  • MONITORUL FICIA E.- PARTEA Twa Kele,AA.04.34.44
    r".7 FW 4kte.a,W414.4iAt4 .4.-104191re Anra CXVI Nr. 175 25 LEI EXEMPLARUL SimbAti 31 Tulle 1948. Ae442i-f, REPUBLICA POPULARAnomANA MONITORUL FICIA e.- PARTEA twa kele,AA.04.34.44. LEGI, DECRETE DECIZIUNI ALE CONSILIULUI DE MINISTRI, DECIZIUNI MINISTERIALE,COMUNICATE, ANUNTURI JUDICIARE (DE INTERES GENERAL) etc iewc 4031171:MOCIIIIIMP Desbaterile .Partea 1-a saua II-a ABONAMENTE iN LEI parlamentnre PUBLIdA IIIIN 1.E I inaerpa M.O. I on6Iani31uni1 lunasesiune I1 tuna LINIA iN TARA : DECRETE $1 JURNALE ALE CONSILIULU1 DE MINISTRI: 4Particulari 3.600 1.800 900 500 Peptru acordares avantajelor legii pentru incurajarea indus- Autoritati de Stat, judetsi comu-. triei la industrissi .71 fabricanti 6.000 Idem pentru meseriasi si mori taranesti tulle 1.500 ' 3.000 1.500 750 incetitenire si depuneri de juramant 2.003 Autoritati comunale rurale 2.500 1.250 625 autorizAri pentra rnfiintiri de birourt varnale 2000 DECIZII OlOrice abonali 2.500 500 Schimbari de ounre 2.000 INSTRA1NATATE 8.000 5.000 1.000CITATIILE: Curtilor de Casatie,Conturi,Apel,Tribunate t notari publici tinexemplar din anul curent lei.... 25 part. 1-aI 25 part. II-a 25 pa t. III-a 500 Judecatoriilor 250 anii expirati 50 50 " AMENAJAMENTE DE PADURI ,Abonarnentul lapartea Ill-a (Desbaterile parlamentare) pentrri sesiunile ordinare Priduri dintre 0 10 ha 150 10,01 20 .. 300 ........ , 500 prelungite sau extraordinare se socoteste 1.000 leI lunar (minimum 1 tuna). .1 20,01 100 100.01 209 2.000 Abonamentele si publicatiile pentru autorit8tiiparticulari se platesc anticipat. 1 200,01 500 3.000 ele vor fi insotite de o adresa din partea autoritatilor si de e cerere timbrata din 500,01-1000 4.000 trartea particularilor.
    [Show full text]
  • La Bucure{Ti Summit Nato
    SUMMIT NATO LA BUCURE{TI general-maior (r) dr. MIHAIL E. IONESCU Summitul NATO, desfăşurat la Bucureşti • Invitarea fostei Republici Iugoslave în zilele de 2-4 aprilie, este, fără îndoială, cea a Macedoniei, imediat după ce aceasta îşi mai mare reuniune a Alianţei Euroatlantice va reglementa cu Grecia problema denu- din întreaga sa istorie şi va rămâne un reper mirii ţării, aşadar fără a mai aştepta un important în evoluţia lumii contemporane. alt summit; Prezenţa în capitala ţării noastre a 24 de şefi de stat, 26 de premieri şi 87 de oficiali cu • Sprijinirea şi susţinerea candidaturii rang de ministru, din cele 26 de state Ucrainei şi Georgiei pentru obţinerea Mem- membre ale Alianţei, 23 de state partenere, bership Action Plan, ca un prim pas către precum şi reprezentanţi ai unor instituţii şi aderarea acestora la NATO (declaraţia finală organizaţii internaţionale de prim rang a făcut a Consiliului Nord-Atlantic precizează că ca numele Bucureştilor şi al României să aceste state „vor deveni membre ale NATO”); devină astfel foarte vizibile pe mapamond. • Invitarea Bosniei Herţegovina şi a Summitul de la Bucureşti a reconfirmat Muntenegrului la începerea unui dialog profunzimea şi continuitatea procesului de intensificat privind întreaga gamă de pro- transformare a NATO, materializat în inte- bleme politice, militare, financiare şi de grarea de noi membri pe baza unor decizii securitate, legate de aspiraţiile lor de a de- adoptate prin consens, amplificarea şi efi- veni membri ai Alianţei; cientizarea capabilităţilor militare în tea- trele de operaţii, creşterea capacităţii de • Disponibilitatea NATO de a avea o reacţie la provocările mediului internaţional relaţie substanţială de cooperare cu Serbia de securitate, sporirea contribuţiei la asi- pentru a o ajuta să progreseze în direcţia gurarea stabilităţii internaţionale.
    [Show full text]
  • CALENDARUL TRADITIILOR 2013 COMPLET.Indd
    Serviciul Istoric al Armatei CALENDARUL TRADIŢIILOR MILITARE 2013 Anul IV/2012 CALENDARUL TRADIŢIILOR MILITARE 2013 Periodic de istorie şi cultură militară editat de Serviciul Istoric al Armatei, iinţarea Statului Major General lansat cu prilejul împlinirii a 150 de ani de la înf Editura Centrului tehnic-editorial al armatei Bucureşti, 2012 Editor: Serviciul Istoric al Armatei Documentarişti: Dr. Veronica BONDAR CONSILIUL EDITORIAL: Luminiţa GAVRA General-locotenent dr. Valeriu NICUŢ General-maior dr. Avram CĂTĂNICI Procesare texte: Colonel (r) dr. Petre OTU Comandor dr. Marian MOŞNEAGU Mihaela CĂLIN Colonel dr. Petrişor FLOREA Nicoleta CHIRIACESCU Dr. Cornel ŢUCĂ Mirela CONSTANDA Eleonora DIMA DIRECTOR FONDATOR: Comandor dr. Marian MOŞNEAGU DTP: Mm Cătălin PINTILIE Tudora NECOARĂ COLEGIUL DE REDACŢIE: Redactor-şef: Corectori: Dr. Luminiţa GIURGIU Jenica NICOLAE Eleonora DINCĂ Redactori: Dr. Iulian BOŢOGHINĂ Lucian DRĂGHICI Drd. Teodora GIURGIU Locotenent-colonel Gabriel PĂTRAŞCU Dr. Manuel STĂNESCU Dr. Leontin STOICA Coperta 1: Căsătoria căpitanului aviator Titus Pahone. Coperta 4: Mesajul şefului Marelui Stat Major în „Album militar presintat M.S. Regelui la 10 mai 1891“. Fotografiile provin din fototecile Serviciului Istoric al Armatei, Centrului de Studii şi Păstrare a Arhivelor Militare, Muzeului Militar Naţional „Ferdinand I“, Bibliotecii Naţionale a României şi din colecţiile autorilor ISSN 2066-9402 Editură recunoscută de către C.N.C.S./C.N.A.T.D.C.U. – Panel 4 – „Domeniul ştiinţe militare, informaţii şi ordine publică Orice reproducere din „Calendarul Tradiţiilor Militare 2013“ este interzisă fără aprobarea prealabilă. SUMAR Capitoulul I – FAMILIA MILITARĂ – comandor dr. Marian MOŞNEAGU ................................ 7 Capitolul II – MILITARUL ÎN SOCIETATEA ROMÂNEASCĂ .................................................. 9 MARIAJUL MILITARILOR ROMÂNI – comandor dr. Marian MOŞNEAGU ............................
    [Show full text]
  • Roma As Alien Music and Identity of the Roma in Romania
    Roma as Alien Music and Identity of the Roma in Romania A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2018 Roderick Charles Lawford DECLARATION This work has not been submitted in substance for any other degree or award at this or any other university or place of learning, nor is being submitted concurrently in candidature for any degree or other award. Signed ………………………………………… Date ………………………… STATEMENT 1 This thesis is being submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of PhD. Signed ………………………………………… Date ………………………… STATEMENT 2 This thesis is the result of my own independent work/investigation, except where otherwise stated, and the thesis has not been edited by a third party beyond what is permitted by Cardiff University’s Policy on the Use of Third Party Editors by Research Degree Students. Other sources are acknowledged by explicit references. The views expressed are my own. Signed ………………………………………… Date ………………………… STATEMENT 3 I hereby give consent for my thesis, if accepted, to be available online in the University’s Open Access repository and for inter-library loan, and for the title and summary to be made available to outside organisations. Signed ………………………………………… Date ………………………… ii To Sue Lawford and In Memory of Marion Ethel Lawford (1924-1977) and Charles Alfred Lawford (1925-2010) iii Table of Contents List of Figures vi List of Plates vii List of Tables ix Conventions x Acknowledgements xii Abstract xiii Introduction 1 Chapter 1 - Theory and Method
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Applus Services S.A., Financial Statements
    Applus Services, S.A. Financial Statements for the year ended 31 December 2020 and Directors' Report, together with Independent Auditor's Report Translation of a report originally issued in Spanish based on our work performed in accordance with the audit regulations in force in Spain and of financial statements originally issued in Spanish and prepared in accordance with the regulatory financial reporting framework applicable to the Company in Spain (see Notes 2 and 14). In the event of a discrepancy, the Spanish-language version prevails. This declaration is a translation for informative purposes only of the original document issued in Spanish, which has been signed for approval by every Board member. In the event of discrepancy, the Spanish- language version prevails. The members of the Board of Directors of Applus Services, S.A. declare that, to the best of their knowledge, the individual financial statements of Applus Services, S.A. (comprising the statement of financial position, statement of profit or loss, the statement of changes in equity, the statement of cash flows and the explanatory notes) for the year ended at 31 December 2020, prepared in accordance with the accounting policies applicable and approved by the Board of Directors at its meeting on 18 February 2021, present fairly the equity, financial position and results of Applus Services, S.A., and that the management report accompanying such financial statements includes a fair analysis of the business’ evolution, results and the financial position of Applus Services, S.A, as well as a description of the principal risks and uncertainties that the company faces.
    [Show full text]
  • The Propaganda War in Nasser's Egypt, 1952–1967
    DEFINING THE ENEMY AS ISRAEL, ZIONIST, NEO-NAZI, OR JEWISH: THE PROPAGANDA WAR IN NASSER’S EGYPT, 1952–1967 Michael Sharnoff President Gamal Abdel Nasser‘s repudiation that Egypt‘s conflict with Israel should be viewed in the context of Egypt‘s aversion to Zionism — not the Jewish people — requires a greater examination of the declarations and actions under Nasser‘s Egypt. To gain a more cogent understanding of Nasser‘s perception of Israel and Jews, it is necessary first to define anti-Zionism and antisemitism. Zionism is a political and nationalist movement which claims that Jews have the right to self-determination. Most Jews consider the manifestation of Zionism as the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948 — the rebirth of their nation after nearly 2,000 years in exile. Anti- Zionists claim they do not have specific grievances against the Jewish people per se, but rather they do not believe that Jews constitute a distinct nation requiring a homeland in Israel. Many anti-Zionists espouse radical views such as calling for the liquidation of the state of Israel and the expulsion of the Jews living there. The European Union Agency for Human Rights defines antisemitism as a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, towards Jewish community institutions and religious facilities. This includes calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing of Jews; dehumanizing Jews; holding Jews collectively responsible for real or imagined events; denying or trivializing the Holocaust; and accusing Jews of dual loyalties or being more sympathetic to Israel than their own nations.
    [Show full text]
  • Considerations on the Development of Romanian Foreign Policy During Communist Period
    <; / uıcy J)ogu /\1'tııpn :\ruil!r 1 11(ı/un !> c ı xi~i 'ı 'ı! : .2() 12 '>uy ı: .2..: ',/: 'J'J 1 I <ı CONSIDERATIONS ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF ROMANIAN FOREIGN POLICY DURING COMMUNIST PERIOD Associate Prof. Dr. Cristina NEDELCU* Yrd. Doç. Dr. Ömer METİN** Abstract The topic ofthe paper is related to the developrnent ofthe Rornanian foreign policy dur­ ing few decades of the Comrnunist era. The initiative is based on the general observation that starting the 60's Rornania started to di stance herself from Moscow's guidance and it developed stronger ties with Western countries, but also with the so-called Third World group. This is the general context whi ch made possibl e questions such as Had Ronıania deve loped an autonomous foreign policy? Ifyes, who designed it? or What exactly meant an autonomous policy? Key words: Ronıania , foreign policy, communist, ideo logy Özet Bu ça lı ş ımı , Romanya ' nın komünist dönemdeki dı ş politik as ının on yıllık dönem­ ler halindeki ge li ş imi il e il gi lidir. l960'lı y ıll a rın ba ş ından itibaren Romanya ' nın , Moskova 'nın lid e rli ği ile ara s ın a mesafe koyduğu, Batılı ve Üçüncü Dünya Ülkeleri il e de bağlarını g üçl e ndirdiği gözlemlenmişti. Bu durum beraberinde Rornan ya ' nın özerk bir politika izledi mi soru sunu gündeme getirmekteydi. Eğer yanıt evet ise bunu kim tasarla­ d ı ? Ya da bu g:e rçcktcn Ö7crk hir p o liti k cı mı yd ı ? Anah ta r k:d i ıııder: i {l ı ııı ; 1 1 1 \ ; 1.
    [Show full text]