Victims of War must be loyal to deserve protection: International law and national legislation on enemy aliens 1907-1918

In international law the internment of civilians has only been regulated in writing in the context of the 4th Geneva Convention of 1949. Nevertheless this did not mean that civilians were not protected by at least some rules of customary international law before that date and especially in World War I. Furthermore specialists of international law expected states – at least those considered to be part of the community of civilized nations – to continue to treat all men equal before the law even in wartime. As research already conducted (Bird, Panayi, Fischer) has shown, this was not the case during World War I. Based on these findings the presentation proposed here wants to look into the development of international law and into some national preparations for treating so called “enemy aliens” in the period before 1914 (Austria-Hungary, Australia, United Kingdom), in order to see to what extent principles of international law protecting civilians from the consequences of war can be detected in the pre-war preparations. As far as can be judged so far the issue of loyalty was central in this context. Looking at the war itself, the presentation proposed here will try to look at how far the principles of international law alluded to above continued to influence the policies on “enemy aliens” in the countries mentioned and to see, how the International Committee of the Red Cross tried to use them to legitimize and expand its protective policies in regard to civilians interned in belligerent as well as neutral countries throughout the war.

The Role of the European Imperial Powers throughout the Armenian Schism in the 1870s

The Bull "Reversurus" (1867) and its dogmatic legitimization at the First Vatican Council in 1870 caused not only ecclesiastical controversy and Schism in the Armenian Catholic Church, but it had also wide political consequences for the Armenian Catholics in the Ottoman Empire. The conflict originally between the Armenian Catholics and Rome attracted very soon the attention of the European imperial Powers. France, the British Empire, the German Empire, Austria-Hungary and Russia were the main political powers who were involved in the Armenian affair. A full picture of the role of all these powers for the course of the Armenian Schism is missing. Mostly the role of France is foregrounded in the printed sources, as the main power, which supported the papacy to win during the Armenian affair. The role and the motives of the other imperial powers is almost missing. This article will try to describe as completely as possible the historical and political background, which brought to the escalation of the Armenian conflict beyond the national frontiers and led to number of conflicts at the international and transnational level. It will be shown that the imperial policy in Europe in the 19th century have played an enormous role throughout the Armenian Schism. It will be explained that several historical circumstances in Europe, especially the relation of the European imperial powers to each other as well as their expectations from the Ottoman Empire and its Armenian subjects were decisive for the duration and conclusion of the Armenian Schism.

Microsurgical reconstruction of the head and neck - Current practice of maxillofacial units in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland

Refinement in microvascular reconstructive techniques over the last 30 years has enabled an increasing number of patients to be rehabilitated for both functional and aesthetic reasons. The purpose of this study was to evaluate different microsurgical practice, including perioperative management, in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. The DÖSAK collaborative group for Microsurgical Reconstruction developed a detailed questionnaire which was circulated to units in the three countries. The current practice of the departments was evaluated. Thirty-eight questionnaires were completed resulting in a 47.5% response rate. A considerable variation in the number of microsurgical reconstructions per year was noted. In relation to the timing of bony reconstruction, 10 hospitals did reconstructions primarily (26.3%), 19 secondarily (50%) and 9 (23.7%) hospitals used both concepts. In the postoperative course, 15.8% of hospitals use inhibitors of platelet aggregation, most hospitals use low molecular heparin (52.6%) or other heparin products (44.7%). This survey shows variation in the performance, management, and care of microsurgical reconstructions of patients. This is due in part to the microvascular surgeons available in the unit but it is also due to different types of hospitals where various types of care can be performed in these patients needing special perioperative care.

Delivery room management of very low birth weight infants in Germany, Austria and Switzerland--a comparison of protocols

Surveys from the USA, Australia and Spain have shown significant inter-institutional variation in delivery room (DR) management of very low birth weight infants (VLBWI, <1500g) at birth, despite regularly updated international guidelines.

Current state of evidence on 'off-label' therapeutic options for systemic lupus erythematosus, including biological immunosuppressive agents, in Germany, Austria and Switzerland--a consensus report

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) can be a severe and potentially life-threatening disease that often represents a therapeutic challenge because of its heterogeneous organ manifestations. Only glucocorticoids, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, azathioprine, cyclophosphamide and very recently belimumab have been approved for SLE therapy in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Dependence on glucocorticoids and resistance to the approved therapeutic agents, as well as substantial toxicity, are frequent. Therefore, treatment considerations will include 'off-label' use of medication approved for other indications. In this consensus approach, an effort has been undertaken to delineate the limits of the current evidence on therapeutic options for SLE organ disease, and to agree on common practice. This has been based on the best available evidence obtained by a rigorous literature review and the authors' own experience with available drugs derived under very similar health care conditions. Preparation of this consensus document included an initial meeting to agree upon the core agenda, a systematic literature review with subsequent formulation of a consensus and determination of the evidence level followed by collecting the level of agreement from the panel members. In addition to overarching principles, the panel have focused on the treatment of major SLE organ manifestations (lupus nephritis, arthritis, lung disease, neuropsychiatric and haematological manifestations, antiphospholipid syndrome and serositis). This consensus report is intended to support clinicians involved in the care of patients with difficult courses of SLE not responding to standard therapies by providing up-to-date information on the best available evidence.