No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Return of the Baltic Germans
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 September 2013
Extract
There is little point to speculating at this time upon the historical significance of the resettlement of populations recently carried out in Europe. Yet the mechanics of a transfer of such magnitude are of interest, and a fairly adequate account can now be presented of the return of the Baltic Germans.
On October 15, 1939, Estonia, and on October 30, 1939, Latvia, signed treaties regulating this translocation of presons of German nationality. No agreement was made with Lithuania where, after the loss of Memel, there remained only about 30,000 Germans, mostly peasants.
- Type
- International Affairs
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Political Science Association 1942
References
1 Lithuania apparently played a somewhat different part in German plans from that of Estonia and Latvia. The German Foreign Minister, Ribbentrop, stated on June 22, 1941, that in the first Russian-German pact of August 23, 1939, Lithuania remained in the German sphere of interest. In the second pact—the frontier and friendship agreement of September 28, 1939—the German government “with heavy heart” relinguished its interests in a greater part of Lithuania to Russia. A strip of Lithuania, however, “still remained within the German sphere of interest.” Ribbentrop further maintained that the Soviet government declared at that time “that it did not intend to occupy, Bolshevize, or annex any states situated within their sphere of interest other than territories of the former Polish state” (New York Times, June 23, 1941). This latter statement is in accord with the Russian promises made to the Baltic States in the autumn of 1939. In a secret clause to the Russian-Latvian pact of October 5, 1939, Russia even promised that the number of troops stationed in Latvia should not exceed 25,000, and that after the conclusion of the European War these should be recalled to Soviet Russia ( Latvian Information Bulletin, issued by the Latvian Legation, Washington, D.C., June, 1941, p. 2 Google Scholar).
2 In 1925, a law was passed which permitted any minority of over 3,000 to establish a representative Cultural Council of from twenty to sixty members, with an executive committee. This council was empowered to control the educational, cultural, and charitable institutions ministering to the minority concerned. It could levy taxes, and in addition was granted certain funds from the state treasury, particularly educational subsidies. The law was one of the wisest and best ad ministered attempts to deal with minorities in post-war Europe. See Macartney, C. A.. National States and National Minorities (London, 1934), p. 408 Google Scholar; Pullerits, A. (ed.), Estonia: Population, Cultural and Economic Life (Tallinn, 1937), pp. 16–17.Google Scholar
3 “Chronique,” Revue Baltique, Vol. 1, pp. 144–145 (Feb., 1940).
4 For the text of the German-Latvian treaty, see Latvian Information Bulletin, Dec. 21, 1939.
5 Information with regard to the set-up of the evacuation procedure as here described was obtained from Krieg, Hans, Baltischer Aufbruch zum deutschen Osten (Berlin, 1940), pp. 26–53.Google Scholar
6 “In the course of the repatriation, German ships called at Latvian ports 73 times in order to take home their blood brothers.” Latvian Monthly Bulletin, issued by the Latvian Legation in London, Jan., 1940, pp. 2–3.Google Scholar
7 Krieg, , Baltischer Aufbruch, p. 43 Google Scholar; see also Krieg, Hans (ed.), Baltenbrief zur Rückkehr ins Reich (Berlin, 1940), pp. 68–69.Google Scholar
8 Latvian Information Bulletin, Jan. 31, 1940, p. 2.
9 “Chronique,” Revue Baltique, Vol. 1, p. 145 (Feb., 1940).
10 New York Times, Aug. 26, 1940.
11 Ibid., Jan. 11, 15, 1941.
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.