“Here orphans in Prague are being given new shoes, August 25, 1946. The U.. Holocaust Museum identifies the children as Jewish orphans, but provides no details. Few Czech Jews, especially children, survived the German World war II occupation. We do not know how they managed to survive. We are not sure who is taking care of these children, but we assume it is UNRAA. Source: U.S. Holovaust Museum.”
After reading the first part of Cohen’s “In War’s Wake: Europe’s Displaced Persons in Postwar Order and Zahra’s “‘A Human Treasure’-Europe’s Displaced Children Between Nationalism and Internationalism, ” my understanding of the displaced persons epidemic that caused distress across the European continent is viewed with better understanding. I like how the Zahra article shows the perspective using children, while the Cohen reading takes on the topic beginning with the biggest American face during that timeframe—Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
After World War II, much of the world was in shambles. With the destruction, many people lost their homes, families and much more. The problem of displaced persons and refugees, like Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt had proclaimed before the war was over, exceeded any problem that the world has seen before World War II (Cohen, 2). A large portion of these people had been inhabitants of Hitler’s Germany. After the war was over, Germany became divided amongst the Allied powers, which made up of the United States, Britain, France and the Soviet Union. While the powers of the West had similar ideologies and formed different organizations like the International Refugee Organization and the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (the two would eventually merge), some of the powers within the Soviet Union refuted these claims (Cohen, 33). As the result of the First World War was a cause of the Second World War, the differentiating opinions with what the world should do with these displaced persons was one of the leading causes of the Cold War. The two sides could not come to an agreement on this topic, therefore delaying the verdict on what would happen to these people.
Further into the readings, it seemed that the issues of the displaced persons was not at all a humanitarian issue but more of a political one than it ever should have been. All this began from the differing opinions between those in the west and those in the east. A sense of nationalism and a love of your country is something that you are taught and given over time, however, in this war there had been many children who were born with parents of different races or from different countries. Where would these children go? Due to things like military conscription, deportation, population displacement and many other things, families in Europe were internationalized like never before (Zahra, 332-333). Would the best interest of these children be thought of? Or would they be put into a country just as a number into which they could be of greater benefit and be a better asset to the country? As we read in Zahra, some countries would claim displaced people with a tie to their country in efforts to just increase their population and to help in the reconstruction efforts after the havoc had been wreaked in the Second World War.
As FDR and his wife predicted, the displaced persons and refugees that were as result of the war became a greater problem than we had ever seen before. A problem that began as a humanitarian issue quickly took a political identity. People who had been moved out of their home country during the war were held at a stand still. Many variables were thrown into the equation of why this happened though. Whether it was not knowing where to put a child with a mixed nationality, disagreements within organizations between the west and the east on where they should place the people, or the causes of the war within Germany and the USSR that would effect the days to come even after the war was over, the displaced people were put at a disservice. In the situation that was such a tragedy, the humanitarian issues should have trumped political ideology, however, as we read in the articles, that was not the case.
Good use of the quote from Franklin Roosevelt early on. The decision to reclaim displaced people probably seemed like a must do after the war. This was once Hitler’s Germany like you said. You mention that this issue was a leading cause for the Cold War. That is fact I find myself agreeing with. When reading, this information did you believe that the powers that were in play thought deeply about the backlash of moving people around as they did?
Christopher Jackson
It was interesting that you claimed that the placement of these displaced peoples was a cause a major lead up to the start of the Cold War. I only saw it as a something more minor disagreement that helped reinforce what did lead to the Cold War. Can you explain to me how you see this issue as a major lead up to the Cold War more in depth? Also, your direct stance on it being a more political than social issue for the time was good at getting to the point. I feel like most people who have talked about the social issues of it first and then discussed how it devolved into a political issue but you went straight to the point.
I absolutely agree with your point that what should have beena humanitarian issue became a political one. I feel as if this has echoed into the present with the refugee crisis that is taking place as well. I believe that a big issue was that there were organizations who were dedicated to helping these displaced people but countries like France made it tough to enact humanitarian solutions when France was pursuing its own nationalistic agenda of rebuilding.
You did a good job focusing on the refugees as victims in the arena of political scheming that is post-war Europe. I fully agree that human beings were reduced to national assets, and even though the nation-states were desperate, they should have catered to the needs of the displaced more. Pulling quotes from FDR really helps connect the reader to your article, especially one from the US since it is, as you say, a very recognizable name and face. One to thing to elaborate on is that connection between WWI and WW2, as it is somewhat undefined.
The accuracy of FDR’s claim spoke volumes and you did a good job incorporating it. The dehumanization of individuals, especially children, did cause massive issues in the Postwar society. How the different Allied powers dealt with this issue differed and, because of this, rifts began to form that would eventually lead to tensions and separations in USSR and Western politics. You did a great job at illustrating this in your post.