The aim of this dissertation is to examine the Swedish government’s responses to the Prague Spring, the Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia, the anti-Semitic campaigns in Poland and, first and foremost, to Czechoslovak and Polish-Jewish refugees fleeing their native countries as a result of these event during the formative period of the late 1960s and early 1970s. This has been accomplished by examining the entire process from the decision to admit the refugees in 1968, to their reception and economic integration into Swedish society during the seven-year period necessary for acquiring Swedish citizenship. This study also analyzes discourses in Swedish newspapers relating to these matters and compares the media’s treatment of these two groups. The investigation is guided by factors influencing refugee policy formation such as bureaucratic choices, international relations, local absorption capacity, national security considerations, and Cold War considerations. Press cuttings, diplomatic documents, telegrams, protocols from the departments and government agencies involved, as well as reports from the resettlement centres, and, finally, refugees’ applications for citizenship form the empirical basis of this study. The period under investigation coincides with three key developments in Sweden’s foreign, refugee, and immigrant policies – the emergence of a more activist foreign policy, the shift from labour migration to refugee migration and, finally, the shift from a policy of integration to multiculturalism. In this regard, the overarching objective of the study is to shed some light on these developments and to determine whether the arrival, reception, and integration of these refugees should be regarded as the starting point for new policies towards immigrants and minorities in Sweden, or if it should rather be seen as the finale of the policies that had begun to develop at the end of World War II. The results demonstrate that Sweden’s refugee policy formation of the late 1960s and early 1970s was hardly affected by these major developments. It could be argued that a more active foreign policy was evident in the criticism of the events in Czechoslovakia and Poland and in the admission of the Czechoslovak of Polish-Jewish refugees to Sweden, but a detailed analysis of the motives shows that these decisions were primarily the result of international relations, national security considerations, and economic capacity, along with other considerations that had guided Swedish refugee policy in previous decades. Similarly, at the centre of Sweden’s reception of the Czechoslovak and Polish-Jewish refugees during the late 1960s and early 1970s was, like in previous decades, the labour market orientation of Sweden’s refugee policy. The Czechoslovaks and Polish-Jews did not experience any multiculturalist turn. Overall, Sweden’s responses to the Czechoslovak and Polish-Jewish refugees were consistent with the objectives developed at the end of World War II and thus did not represent a transition in Swedish refugee policymaking.

Prompted by international ramifications of Jewish migration from Nazi Germany, President Franklin D. Roosevelt called a world conference on refugees in March 1938. The conference, held at Evian, France, in July, established the Intergovernmental Committee on Political Refugees. The committee, led by American diplomats, sought relaxation of Germany's discriminatory practices against Jews and tried, without success, to resettle German Jews abroad. World War II ended the committee's efforts to achieve systematic immigration from Germany. The American, British, and German diplomatic papers contain the most thorough chronicle of American involvement in the refugee crisis. Memoirs and presidential public papers provide insight into Roosevelt's motivations for calling the conference. Although efforts to rescue German Jews failed, the refugee crisis introduced Americans to intervention in Europe.

The twentieth century has been called the century of the refugee. The sheer size, scope and persistence of refugee movements was a defining feature of that century because at no other time in history have people so regularly been forced to flee their homes in search of safety. The plight of refugees - both in their flight from home and in their search for a place of exile - is suggestive of the power of ideas about identity in deciding who belongs and who is displaced, stateless and alien. This study explores the significance of these ideas about identity through a case study of the arrival, settlement and experiences of two groups of Spanish and central European refugee children in Britain between 1937 and 1945. It begins by tracing a discourse on Englishness that betrays a contemporary concern for the future survival of the English nation and goes on to investigate how these concerns shaped negotiations for the arrival of refugee children. The principal aim of these negotiations, it is argued, was to ensure the protection of English national identity. The specific form of protection required varied according to the specific group of children under discussion and was based on stereotypical representations of the two groups of children. These representations of the children inscribed them with identities, measured them against the qualities of Englishness and justified the intervention of government in order to guarantee the continued health, peace and prosperity of England. For the Spanish/Basque children the government priority was to protect national health and the political stability of national life. For the Jewish children the aim of government policy was not to stimulate anti-Semitism by exceeding the national 'absorptive capacity'. The resulting carefully controlled settlement of the children, drawn up with various refugee agencies and covering housing, health and education, is analysed in detail throughout this study. In this study attention is also given to the role that the children's cultural and educational capital played in their adaptation to exile. It analyses how children were able to adapt to their experiences in exile by drawing on their own cultural and educational agency. In doing so it questions accounts of migration that focus on assimilation and explores instead the hybrid identities that were developed by refugee children who became adept at negotiating with the culture of Englishness.

Thesis (doctoral)--Technische Universität, Berlin, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 220-238).

<p>The aim is to increase our understanding of the mechanisms of social categorization and discrimination, as well as the connection between them. This has been accomplished by examining Swedish refugee policy towards Jewish refugees during the Second World War and the Holocaust, as conducted by The Foreigner’s Bureau of the National Board of Health and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs during 1938−1944. The study also compares the Swedish refugee policy with that of Denmark, Switzerland, Great Britain and the United States. The investigation is guided by such concepts as social categorization, discrimination, antisemitism, organizational culture and established practice. The primary sources are documents, minutes and personal dossiers; <i>Svensk författningssamling</i> (legislation) and articles in <i>Sociala Meddelanden</i> (the National Board’s official journal).</p><p>The main conclusions are that Sweden was not perceived as a country of immigration, based partly of the widespread fear that too many Jewish refugees would create a “Jewish Question”. Swedish authorities discriminated against Jewish refugees on grounds of “race” through a process of categorization. This process began already in the 1920’s, and gradually transformed the definition of “Jew” from a religious to a “racial” definition, based on the Nuremberg Laws. The differentiation of Jewish refugees in official statistics ceased in September 1943, yet it continued secretly until February 1944, encompassing the Norwegian and Danish Jews as well. One important result shows that the shift in policy – from discrimination to large scale reception – was a slow process where this differentiating practice and antisemitic perceptions remained operative. What is defined as an antisemitic background bustle is used to explain how moderate antisemitic expressions were perceived as “unbiased” and “normal” within the Swedish society. Though Sweden’s refugee policy seems similar to that of other countries surveyed, the shift in policy stands out as unique in comparison.</p>

The aim is to increase our understanding of the mechanisms of social categorization and discrimination, as well as the connection between them. This has been accomplished by examining Swedish refugee policy towards Jewish refugees during the Second World War and the Holocaust, as conducted by The Foreigner’s Bureau of the National Board of Health and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs during 1938−1944. The study also compares the Swedish refugee policy with that of Denmark, Switzerland, Great Britain and the United States. The investigation is guided by such concepts as social categorization, discrimination, antisemitism, organizational culture and established practice. The primary sources are documents, minutes and personal dossiers; Svensk författningssamling (legislation) and articles in Sociala Meddelanden (the National Board’s official journal). The main conclusions are that Sweden was not perceived as a country of immigration, based partly of the widespread fear that too many Jewish refugees would create a “Jewish Question”. Swedish authorities discriminated against Jewish refugees on grounds of “race” through a process of categorization. This process began already in the 1920’s, and gradually transformed the definition of “Jew” from a religious to a “racial” definition, based on the Nuremberg Laws. The differentiation of Jewish refugees in official statistics ceased in September 1943, yet it continued secretly until February 1944, encompassing the Norwegian and Danish Jews as well. One important result shows that the shift in policy – from discrimination to large scale reception – was a slow process where this differentiating practice and antisemitic perceptions remained operative. What is defined as an antisemitic background bustle is used to explain how moderate antisemitic expressions were perceived as “unbiased” and “normal” within the Swedish society. Though Sweden’s refugee policy seems similar to that of other countries surveyed, the shift in policy stands out as unique in comparison.

From 1933 to 1945, thousands of European Jews attempted to gain access to Canada in order to escape Nazi oppression. This thesis examines Canada’s immigration records and policies during this period. In addition to bringing light to key issues concerning popular Canadian perceptions of Jewish immigrants and refugees in the thirties and forties, this history raises important questions about the Canadian government and ethical responsibility in a time of war; about the relationship between government policy and provincial politics; and about the position taken by Canada’s longest serving Prime Minister, William Lyon Mackenzie King, and his Cabinet. The author’s research brings attention to Irving Abella and Harold Troper’s work, None is too Many, which, since its publication in 1982, has stood as the authoritative work on the subject. A variety of important issues which are not treated in detail in this earlier monograph are examined in depth in this analysis: The prevalence of anti-Semitism in French and English Canada, and the Canadian immigration record are treated in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 and 4 investigate accusations that William Lyon Mackenzie King, Ernest Lapointe, Frederick Charles Blair, and Vincent Massey harboured anti-Semitic views. It is found that such charges suffer from a serious lack of evidence. Although sometimes the language used by these men in their correspondence and letters can be shocking to the modern reader, it was the colloquial language during their lives. Furthermore, their personal documents often exhibit evidence of sincere sympathy for the Jews of Europe, and frustration with Canadian popular opinion. The author concludes that collective memory of the Holocaust has affected perceptions concerning the Canadian immigration record during the period in question. Anti-immigration sentiment was strong in Canada during the Depression. Nevertheless, as the Canadian Government became increasingly aware of the persecution of Jews within the Reich, particularly following the events of Kristallnacht in November of 1938, measures were put into place to ease Jewish immigration to Canada, such as including refugees among the admissible classes of immigrants. The Canadian Government did not begin to receive information concerning the extermination of European Jewry until 1942. By this time, there was hardly anything Canada could do. Heinrich Himmler had forbidden Jewish emigration from the Reich in October of 1941, the war was in full swing by 1942, and ships carrying refugees and PoWs were not safe from U-boat attacks. From 1933 to 1945 Canada allowed 8,787 Jews into the country. However, all immigration to Canada was slowed during this time. Consequently, Jews, in actuality, represented a higher percentage of immigrants arriving in Canada, at this time, than they had from 1923 to 1932. This illustrates Canada’s doors we not closed specifically to Jewish refugees during the Depression and Second World War.

From 1933 to 1945, thousands of European Jews attempted to gain access to Canada in order to escape Nazi oppression. This thesis examines Canada’s immigration records and policies during this period. In addition to bringing light to key issues concerning popular Canadian perceptions of Jewish immigrants and refugees in the thirties and forties, this history raises important questions about the Canadian government and ethical responsibility in a time of war; about the relationship between government policy and provincial politics; and about the position taken by Canada’s longest serving Prime Minister, William Lyon Mackenzie King, and his Cabinet. The author’s research brings attention to Irving Abella and Harold Troper’s work, None is too Many, which, since its publication in 1982, has stood as the authoritative work on the subject. A variety of important issues which are not treated in detail in this earlier monograph are examined in depth in this analysis: The prevalence of anti-Semitism in French and English Canada, and the Canadian immigration record are treated in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 and 4 investigate accusations that William Lyon Mackenzie King, Ernest Lapointe, Frederick Charles Blair, and Vincent Massey harboured anti-Semitic views. It is found that such charges suffer from a serious lack of evidence. Although sometimes the language used by these men in their correspondence and letters can be shocking to the modern reader, it was the colloquial language during their lives. Furthermore, their personal documents often exhibit evidence of sincere sympathy for the Jews of Europe, and frustration with Canadian popular opinion. The author concludes that collective memory of the Holocaust has affected perceptions concerning the Canadian immigration record during the period in question. Anti-immigration sentiment was strong in Canada during the Depression. Nevertheless, as the Canadian Government became increasingly aware of the persecution of Jews within the Reich, particularly following the events of Kristallnacht in November of 1938, measures were put into place to ease Jewish immigration to Canada, such as including refugees among the admissible classes of immigrants. The Canadian Government did not begin to receive information concerning the extermination of European Jewry until 1942. By this time, there was hardly anything Canada could do. Heinrich Himmler had forbidden Jewish emigration from the Reich in October of 1941, the war was in full swing by 1942, and ships carrying refugees and PoWs were not safe from U-boat attacks. From 1933 to 1945 Canada allowed 8,787 Jews into the country. However, all immigration to Canada was slowed during this time. Consequently, Jews, in actuality, represented a higher percentage of immigrants arriving in Canada, at this time, than they had from 1923 to 1932. This illustrates Canada’s doors we not closed specifically to Jewish refugees during the Depression and Second World War.

From 1933 to 1945, thousands of European Jews attempted to gain access to Canada in order to escape Nazi oppression. This thesis examines Canada’s immigration records and policies during this period. In addition to bringing light to key issues concerning popular Canadian perceptions of Jewish immigrants and refugees in the thirties and forties, this history raises important questions about the Canadian government and ethical responsibility in a time of war; about the relationship between government policy and provincial politics; and about the position taken by Canada’s longest serving Prime Minister, William Lyon Mackenzie King, and his Cabinet. The author’s research brings attention to Irving Abella and Harold Troper’s work, None is too Many, which, since its publication in 1982, has stood as the authoritative work on the subject. A variety of important issues which are not treated in detail in this earlier monograph are examined in depth in this analysis: The prevalence of anti-Semitism in French and English Canada, and the Canadian immigration record are treated in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 and 4 investigate accusations that William Lyon Mackenzie King, Ernest Lapointe, Frederick Charles Blair, and Vincent Massey harboured anti-Semitic views. It is found that such charges suffer from a serious lack of evidence. Although sometimes the language used by these men in their correspondence and letters can be shocking to the modern reader, it was the colloquial language during their lives. Furthermore, their personal documents often exhibit evidence of sincere sympathy for the Jews of Europe, and frustration with Canadian popular opinion. The author concludes that collective memory of the Holocaust has affected perceptions concerning the Canadian immigration record during the period in question. Anti-immigration sentiment was strong in Canada during the Depression. Nevertheless, as the Canadian Government became increasingly aware of the persecution of Jews within the Reich, particularly following the events of Kristallnacht in November of 1938, measures were put into place to ease Jewish immigration to Canada, such as including refugees among the admissible classes of immigrants. The Canadian Government did not begin to receive information concerning the extermination of European Jewry until 1942. By this time, there was hardly anything Canada could do. Heinrich Himmler had forbidden Jewish emigration from the Reich in October of 1941, the war was in full swing by 1942, and ships carrying refugees and PoWs were not safe from U-boat attacks. From 1933 to 1945 Canada allowed 8,787 Jews into the country. However, all immigration to Canada was slowed during this time. Consequently, Jews, in actuality, represented a higher percentage of immigrants arriving in Canada, at this time, than they had from 1923 to 1932. This illustrates Canada’s doors we not closed specifically to Jewish refugees during the Depression and Second World War.

The work studies a very specific period of the Czech-Cuban relations: the period of World War II and the Czechoslovakian refugees in Havana. For its creation, materials from two archives were used: the Archive of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, the so-called "London Archive" which keeps the documentation of the Czechoslovak government in exile, and the National Archive of Cuba. In the first half of the 20th century, Cuba was not for the Czech society a distant country on the other side of the world. It was its partner and competitor on the world sugar market, and the echoes of Cuban independence were still fresh in its memory. The young Czechoslovak republic was looking for markets for its industrial and consumer products, while Cuban exports generally did not exceed a few dozen tons of unroasted coffee. In the inter-war period, some 20 Czechs and Slovaks were living in Cuba. The Munich Treaty, the occupation and then the application of the Nuremberg Laws created an atmosphere of suffocation and drastically reduced the living space for the Jewish population in the occupied territory of Czechoslovakia. Many decided to leave their homeland, but the world around them was unwilling to receive larger numbers of Jewish refugees. The original idea of getting to a safe place beyond...