Suchergebnisse

The complexity of the ever-shifting humanitarian landscape in the Middle East region – where the effects of perennial conflict and instability have rarely been contained within one country – is a major preoccupation for humanitarian organisations like the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

In this research paper, the author analyzes the actions taken on behalf of the Russian government in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine. In particular, attention is paid to measures such as the pseudo-referendums held at the end of September 2022 in the east and south-east of Ukraine, the Kremlin's propaganda, the policy of the occupiers related to the establishment of pro-Russian administrations, control of the local population, deportation of Ukrainians, the distribution of Russian passports, the introduction of a Russian education system and other measures of Russification as well as mass violations of the fundamental principles of human rights.
In October 2022, the Russian State Duma unanimously supported the incorporation of the so-called "Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics" and Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions into the Russian Federation.
After the pseudo-referendums held in the four temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine, on September 30, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed "agreements" with the representatives of the occupation regime on the acceptance of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia regions into Russia.
The documents were published on October 3, but it remained unclear where, in the occupants' opinion, the borders of Russia now lay in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine.
These actions contradict the basic principles of international law on the territorial integrity of a state and the inviolability of borders. The results of the "referendums" were not recognized by any country in the world, including the closest allies of the Kremlin such as Belarus, or even those countries that had recognized Abkhazia and the so-called "independence" of South Ossetia (Venezuela, Nicaragua, Syria, Nauru). Accordingly, the holding of pseudo-referendums is another weak attempt by Russia to impoverish Ukraine's statehood, especially since Russia lost control of a significant portion of its "newly-joined territories" as a result of bold actions on the part of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

The article examines a range of questions tied to Nazi Germany's socio-economic policies in occupied Ukraine during World War II. In line with implementing the General Plan "Ost," the top leadership of the Third Reich intended to cleanse the "eastern territories" of its "superfluous" population for German colonization. As contained in the "Principles of Economic Policy in the East," these directives provided for the physical extermination of tens of millions of people in various ways, as well as the deportation of part of the indigenous population to remote areas. Ukraine's economic exploitation was built in such a way that it doomed the local urban and rural societies to a miserable, half-starved existence. The systematic seizure of food for the needs of the Wehrmacht, the Reich, and its allies made the death of the inhabitants of the occupied lands only a matter of time. The instrumentalization of terror by famine was manifested, on the one hand, by the creation of special structures that requisitioned food resources, and on the other by establishing norms of food supplies that were below the minimal needs for existence. As well, the strict regulation of trade set limits to the sources of food products that could be brought to the cities. This caused mass starvation. The deaths and the diseases that followed created hundreds of thousands of victims among Ukrainians.

How successful was the United States in attempting to impose a democratic system on Germany after the Second World War? Did U.S. occupation policy actually change German society and attitudes? In this book Richard L. Merritt addresses these questions from a novel perspective. Instead of studying what German political leaders and intellectuals thought about the U.S. occupation, Merritt explores for the first time the response of the ordinary German people, analyzing data from public opinion surveys conducted largely by the American Military Government beginning in 1945. Much has been written about the feasibility of externally directed programs to foster economic change in industrial nations or change in general in Third World countries. But this book is unique in assessing the actual impact of efforts to impose social change on a highly advanced foreign country. What Merritt finds is that ordinary Germans were actually more receptive to American reforms than were the German elites, and that imposing social change on a foreign people is difficult but not impossible if the population generally acknowledges the need for change. The book thus offers insights into the possible success of foreign intervention to effect social change in highly developed countries, an issue of increasing relevance with the emergence of extreme right-wing groups in Germany and elsewhere today