Latvia

2019 ◽  
pp. 213-224
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Jewish Community ◽  
Private Property ◽  
World War ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Property Restitution

During World War II, the independent Republic of Latvia was attacked and formally annexed by the Soviet Union in 1940. It was subsequently invaded and occupied by Germany in 1941 until Soviet troops re-entered the country in 1944. Shortly after Latvia’s independence was restored in 1990, Latvia began enacting private property restitution laws. The goal was to undo over 50 years of nationalization and confiscation under Communism and to renew the property rights of all former owners, Jews and non-Jews alike. Latvia was also quick to enact religious property legislation in 1992, albeit with restrictions that uniquely impacted the Jewish community. A portfolio of legislation that returned five additional communal properties was passed by the Parliament in early 2016. No legislation has been enacted dealing specifically with heirless property. Latvia endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Finland

2019 ◽  
pp. 133-136
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Nazi Germany ◽  
World War ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Anti Jewish ◽  
Property Restitution

Between 1939 and 1944, Finland fought two separate wars against the Soviet Union. In 1941, Finland entered World War II aligned with Nazi Germany in its fight against the Soviet Union. Finland was never conquered or occupied by Germany, nor were any anti-Jewish laws passed in the country. No immovable property—private, communal, or heirless—was taken from Jews or other targeted groups in Finland during the war. As a result, no immovable property restitution laws were required. Finland endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Slovenia

2019 ◽  
pp. 415-430
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Jewish Community ◽  
Private Property ◽  
World War ◽  
Foreign Nationals ◽  
Communal Property ◽  
The Law ◽  
Second Wave ◽  
Property Restitution

Yugoslavia (which included present-day Slovenia) was occupied by Germany, Italy, and Hungary during World War II, and immovable property was confiscated. Roughly 90 percent of the Jews who lived in Slovenia before World War II were murdered during the war. Postwar Yugoslavia enacted a short-lived property restitution law. As Yugoslavia fell under Communist rule, widespread nationalization resulted in a second wave of property confiscations. Slovenia gained its independence in 1991 and that same year passed a denationalization law, which was later amended to permit foreign nationals to make property claims. The law addresses the restitution of private property nationalized between 1945 and 1963. The law has also been used to gain return of communal property. Some communal property has been returned to the Jewish community in Slovenia, despite lack of specific legislation. Slovenia has not passed legislation for the restitution of heirless property. Slovenia endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Serbia

2019 ◽  
pp. 385-400
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Jewish Community ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Nazi Germany ◽  
Property Law ◽  
World War ◽  
Communal Property ◽  
Second Wave ◽  
Property Restitution

Yugoslavia (which included present-day Serbia) was invaded by the Axis powers in 1941. Nazi Germany established a brutal occupation. Other parts of modern-day Serbia were occupied by Hungary, Bulgaria and Italy. Roughly 85 percent of the Jews who lived in Serbia before World War II were murdered. Postwar war Yugoslavia enacted a short-lived property restitution law. As Yugoslavia fell under Communist rule, widespread nationalization resulted in a second wave of property confiscations. Restitution began in the 2000s. Serbia is the only country that has enacted private property restitution legislation since endorsing the Terezin Declaration in 2009. Serbia has also passed communal property legislation—albeit with key limitations whose effects have disproportionately negatively impacted the Jewish community. In February 2016, Serbia enacted heirless property restitution legislation and the first country to enact an heirless property law since the Terezin Declaration was drafted in 2009. Serbia endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Russia

2019 ◽  
pp. 379-384
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Bolshevik Revolution ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Communal Property ◽  
Great Patriotic War ◽  
Occupied Territories ◽  
Property Confiscation ◽  
Property Restitution

In 1941, Germany invaded the Soviet Union, in violation of the 1939 Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. The invasion marked the beginning of what Russia would later call the Great Patriotic War during which the Soviet Union suffered tens of millions of civilian and military losses. Private property in the Soviet Union was earlier confiscated through Lenin and Stalin’s nationalization programs. Nazi-occupied territories of the Soviet Union suffered property confiscation by the German forces, with most of the confiscation taking place in the Soviet Republics of Belarussia and Ukraine and western Russia. Russia does not have any private or communal property restitution and/or compensation laws relating to Holocaust-era confiscations, or return of property confiscations dating back to the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917. Russia also does not have any special legislation dealing with heirless property. Russia endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009, but declined to endorse the 2010 Guidelines and Best Practices.

Lithuania

2019 ◽  
pp. 225-240
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Private Property ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
World War ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Communal Property ◽  
Almost All

During World War II, the independent Republic of Lithuania was attacked and formally annexed by the Soviet Union in 1940. It was subsequently invaded by Germany in 1941 until Soviet troops re-entered the country in 1944. Between 1939 and 1943, approximately 90–95 percent of Lithuania’s vibrant prewar Jewish community of 160,000 was murdered. Lithuania is one of the few European countries to enact restitution legislation since the Terezin Declaration was drafted in 2009. Despite passage of its communal property law in 2011, restitution of private and heirless property in the country is still an unsettled issue. Unlike its Baltic neighbors, Estonia and Latvia, Lithuania limits private property restitution to citizens of Lithuania. Lithuania, like its Baltic neighbors and almost all Eastern European states, has no effective heirless property legislation. Lithuania endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

The Anti-Aryan Moment: Decolonization, Diplomacy, and Race in Late Pahlavi Iran

2021 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 691-702
Author(s):  
Firoozeh Kashani-Sabet
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
World War ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Us ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
The Cold War

In 1946, the entertainer and activist Paul Robeson pondered America's intentions in Iran. In what was to become one of the first major crises of the Cold War, Iran was fighting a Soviet aggressor that did not want to leave. Robeson posed the question, “Is our State Department concerned with protecting the rights of Iran and the welfare of the Iranian people, or is it concerned with protecting Anglo-American oil in that country and the Middle East in general?” This was a loaded question. The US was pressuring the Soviet Union to withdraw its troops after its occupation of the country during World War II. Robeson wondered why America cared so much about Soviet forces in Iranian territory, when it made no mention of Anglo-American troops “in countries far removed from the United States or Great Britain.” An editorial writer for a Black journal in St. Louis posed a different variant of the question: Why did the American secretary of state, James F. Byrnes, concern himself with elections in Iran, Arabia or Azerbaijan and yet not “interfere in his home state, South Carolina, which has not had a free election since Reconstruction?”

Atskaņotājmākslas attīstība Liepājā un Otrā pasaules kara ietekme uz mūziķu likteņiem

2021 ◽  
pp. 338-351
Author(s):  
Vēsma Lēvalde
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Performing Arts ◽  
Symphony Orchestra ◽  
Historical Study ◽  
World War ◽  
National Socialist ◽  
Performing Artists ◽  
Cultural Life ◽  
The Soviet Union

The article is a cultural-historical study and a part of the project Uniting History, which aims to discover the multicultural aspect of performing art in pre-war Liepaja and summarize key facts about the history of the Liepāja Symphony Orchestra. The study also seeks to identify the performing artists whose life was associated with Liepāja and who were repressed between 1941 and 1945, because of aggression by both the Soviet Union and National Socialist Germany. Until now, the cultural life of this period in Liepāja has been studied in a fragmentary way, and materials are scattered in various archives. There are inaccurate and even contradictory testimonies of events of that time. The study marks both the cultural and historical situation of the 1920s and the 1930s in Liepāja and tracks the fates of several artists in the period between 1939 and 1945. On the eve of World War II, Liepāja has an active cultural life, especially in theatre and music. Liepāja City Drama and Opera is in operation staging both dramatic performances, operas, and ballet, employing an orchestra. The symphony orchestra also operated at the Liepāja Philharmonic, where musicians were recruited every season according to the principles of contemporary festival orchestras. Liepāja Folk Conservatory (music school) had also formed an orchestra of students and teachers. Guest concerts were held regularly. A characteristic feature of performing arts in Liepaja was its multicultural character – musicians of different nationalities with experience from different schools of the world were encountered there. World War II not only disrupted the balance in society, but it also had a very concrete and tragic impact on the fates of the people, including the performing artists. Many were killed, many repressed and placed in prisons and camps, and many went to exile to the West. Others were forced to either co-operate with the occupation forces or give up their identity and, consequently, their career as an artist. Nevertheless, some artists risked their lives to save others.

Military Industry Evacuation at the Beginning of World War II and the NKVD

2020 ◽  
Vol 152 ◽  
pp. 142-151
Author(s):  
Uta G. Lagvilava ◽  
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Technical Equipment ◽  
World War ◽  
Military Industry ◽  
Emergency Situations ◽  
Military Equipment ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Red Army ◽  
Internal Affairs

A few months after the fascist Germany’s attack on the USSR, under harsh wartime conditions, at the end of 1941 military industry of the Soviet Union began to produce such a quantity of military equipment that subsequently was providing not only replenishment of losses, but also improvement of technical equipment of the Red Army forces . Successful production of military equipment during World War II became one of the main factors in the victory over fascism. One of the unlit pages in affairs of the People’s Commissariat of Internal Affairs (NKVD) is displacement and evacuation of a huge number of enterprises and people to the east, beyond the Urals, which were occupied by German troops at the beginning of the war in the summer of 1941. All this was done according to the plans developed with direct participation of NKVD, which united before the beginning and during the war departments now called the Ministry of Internal Affairs, FSB, SVR, the Russian Guard, Ministry of Emergency Situations, FAPSI and several smaller ones. And all these NKVD structures during the war were headed by Lavrenty Pavlovich Beria.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document