Humanitarian intervention and the issue of state sovereignty in the discourse of legal experts between the 1830s and the First World War

This article discusses the tensions between the principle of state sovereignty and the idea of a "humanitarian intervention" (or a intervention on humanitarian grounds) as they resulted from the debate of leading legal scholars in the 19th and early 20th century. While prominent scholars such as Johann Caspar Bluntschli, Gustave Rolin Jaequemyns or Aegidius Arntz spoke out in favour of a form of "humanitarian interventions", others such as August Wilhelm Heffter or Pasquale Fiore were much more critical and in many cases spoke out in favour of absolute state sovereignty.

Weishenme Zhongguo zai diyi ci shijie dazhan zhong juyou zhongyao zuoyong 为什么中国在第一次世界大战中具有重要作用 (Why China Played an Important Role in the First World War)

Aufbauend auf dem analytischen Tool des Totalen Krieges (vgl. den Artikel des Autors zu Controversy Total War in 1914-1918-Online) werden im vorliegenden Beitrag die Anstrengungen Chinas im Ersten Weltkrieg zu denjenigen anderer nicht europäischer Länder wie Australien, Südafrika oder Indien in Bezug gesetzt. Dabei wird das Ziel verfolgt, den globalen Charakter eines Konfliktes deutlich zu machen, der zurecht als erster Weltkrieg bezeichnet wird und in welchem China sicherlich eine weit bedeutsamere Rolle spielte, als es gemeinhin in der Historiographie dargestellt wird. Ursprünglich wurde der Beitrag als Antwort auf die Frage konzipiert, warum nicht nur China für eine Globalgeschichte des Ersten Weltkrieges von Bedeutung war. Im Verlauf der Übersetzung wurde der Titel dahingehend angepasst, dass stärker die Bedeutung von Chinas Rolle im Ersten Weltkrieg betont wurde.

Annexations in Europe and the Persecution of Jews, 1939-1944

This contribution tries to explain why Jews were persecuted earlier or more fiercely in territories annexed by a state during World War II than in the mainland of that state. The case-studies covered are Nazi Germany, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, and the USSR. It is argued that internationally, similar policies of incorporation, especially the replacement of existing elites and the process of bringing in new settlers, worked against the Jews. Aside from focusing on governmental policies, the contribution also sketches the manner in which individual actions by state functionaries (who did not merely implement state policies) and by non-state actors had adverse effects on the Jewish population, impacting their survival chances. Finally, the article places the persecution of Jews in annexed areas in the context of the concerted violence conducted, at the same time, against other ethnically defined, religious, and social groups.

Internationale Kontrolle lokaler Verwaltung in einer Konfliktregion. Das Experiment „Freie Stadt Danzig“ (1920-1939)

The Free City of Danzig was founded by the Allies after World War One to settle the conflict between Poles and Germans as to which territory the town belonged. The League of Nations was designated to be the guarantor of its status. British and American experts and policy advisors saw it as an experiment on the way to new forms of statehood, by means of which nationalism as the founding principle of territorial entities could be overcome. However, the „Free City“ status was rejected by both the city’s inhabitants and German and Polish government agencies, with the result that the League and its local representative, the High Commissioner, were constantly confronted with difficulties in the interpretation of the international treaties and conventions relating to Danzig. In addition, hardly anyone in Danzig, Germany or Poland was interested in the economic and financial situation of the Free City, but were more interested in winning political battles than in the well-being of the city and its inhabitants. As a result, the situation in Danzig became more and more hopeless. The city became increasingly dependent on (illegal) German subsidies, while the High Commissioners generally cared more about their own prestige and that of their home countries than about the interests of the League of Nations. But as no political means of modifying the city’s status had been provided for, nothing changed formally in Danzig until Germany started the Second World War and annexed the city in September 1939. In retrospect, the international control of local government could not contribute to a long-term solution for Danzig. It merely postponed its violent solution for twenty years.