Table Of ContentINTERGOVERNMENTAL ADVOCATES OF REFUGEES
The Refugee Policy of the League of Nations and the International Labour
Organization in the 1920s and 1930s
Harri Sallinen
ACADEMIC DISSERTATION
To be presented,
with the permission of the Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Helsinki,
for public examination in Auditorium XII, Main building of the University of Helsinki (Unioninkatu 34)
on 15 November 2013, at 12 noon.
Helsinki 2013
Publications of the Department of Political and Economic Studies 10 (2013)
Political History
© Harri Sallinen
Cover: Riikka Hyypiä
Distribution and Sales:
Unigrafia Bookstore
http://kirjakauppa.unigrafia.fi/
[email protected]
PL 4 (Vuorikatu 3 A) 00014 Helsingin yliopisto
ISSN-L 2243-3635
ISSN 2243-3635 (Print)
ISSN 2243-3643 (Online)
ISBN978-952-10-9072-1(paperback)
ISBN 978-952-10-9073-8 (PDF)
Unigrafia, Helsinki 2013
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ABSTRACT
ACRONYMS
KEY CONCEPTS
1. BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES...............................................................................12
1.1. The Refugee Problem after the First World War...........................................................12
1.2. Previous Research........................................................................................................22
1.3. Scope, Task, Methodology, and Presentation...............................................................30
1.4. Sources.........................................................................................................................42
1.5. The League of Nations and the International Labour Organization...............................53
2. REFUGEE SITUATIONS AND THE EARLY EVOLUTION OF
REFUGEE WOR.................................................................................................................60
2.1. Refugee Situations requiring Measures........................................................................60
2.2. Non-Governmental Multilateral Attempts to find Solutions........................................... 75
2.3. New Initiatives...............................................................................................................87
2.4. Fridtjof Nansen as a Project Leader.............................................................................93
2.5. The Making of an Intergovernmental Establishment...................................................100
3. THE REACTIVE PHASE 1921-1930; NANSEN’s TIME.................................................105
3.1. Competence and Principles fitted into the Impartiality of the League System............105
3.1.1. The LON’s Authority and Guidelines.........................................................105
3.1.2. The ILO’s Competence and Restrictions...................................................113
3.2. Organizing and Funding according to arising Challenges...........................................126
3.2.1. Millions of Refugees; Different Premises but similar Problems.................126
3.2.2. The High Commissioner for Refugees......................................................147
3.2.3. The Labour Office and its Refugee Service..............................................155
3.2.4. The Greek and Bulgarian Refugees Settlement Commissions................ 167
3.3. Refugee Aid made possible under the League’s Umbrella........................................ 176
3.3.1. Emergency Relief......................................................................................176
3.3.2. Legal Status and Travel Documents.........................................................181
3.3.3. Repatriation.........................................................................................194
3.3.4. International Agreements and Arrangements.....................................200
3.3.5. Statistics, Settlement, and Loans........................................................208
3.3.6. Residence, Employment, and Assimilation.........................................226
3.4. An Account of the First Decade of Intergovernmental Refugee Work........................240
4. IDEAS ON A PROACTIVE APPROACH 1931-1939; NANSEN’s LEGACY................. 247
4.1. Previous Principles and new Human Rights Motivations............................................247
4.2. The Response to New Requirements..........................................................................259
4.2.1. “Pre-Hitler and Post-Hitler” Refugees.................................................259
4.2.2. Nansen Office.....................................................................................273
4.2.3. The High Commissioner for German Refugees.................................283
4.2.4. The Intergovernmental Committee on Refugees............................... 291
4.2.5. Other Supplementary and Advisory Organs......................................296
4.3. Performance on a Practical Level................................................................................303
4.3.1. Humanitarian Aid...............................................................................303
4.3.2. Political Protection and Identification.................................................304
4.3.3. International Conventions and Arrangements...................................313
4.3.4. Resettlement.....................................................................................318
4.3.5. Permission to Stay and Reside.........................................................324
4.4. An Account of the Second Decade..............................................................................329
5. ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE ADVOCATES......................................................................335
5.1. Tools for Estimation....................................................................................................335
5.2. Necessary Funding......................................................................................................340
5.3. Uneven Attention on the Various Refugee Groups.....................................................343
5.4. Success and Setbacks................................................................................................351
5.5. Were the Problems Solved?........................................................................................358
6. CONCLUSION; Consistency and Stamina formed a Policy...........................................369
SOURCES
APPENDICES I - VII
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
It is never possible to acknowledge all those who contribute to a project that results
in a dissertation. Therefore I confine myself to the most essential contributors. I wish to
thank Professor Seppo Hentilä for following this work through to the end. Special
thanks must be extended to Dr. Katalin Miklóssy for having the patience to read the
work through so many times when the text was taking its form. The comments given
and the amendments recommended during the process have been most valuable.
ABSTRACT
Frontiers remained closed after the First World War and nobody was able to cross
them without a passport and a visa on the passport from the representative of the
country to which the traveller wished to go. As the refugee problem became an
international subject requiring measures after the War, the international community was
forced to take the issue on the agenda which previously was labeled by political items
concerning war and peace. The world had to study the matters concerning refugees
and also take action accordingly.
The failure of the League of Nations in its central task, maintaining peace, has
influenced the evaluation of other operations of the intergovernmental machinery
during the Inter-war period. The achievements and the importance of the refugee work
undertaken during the 1920s and 1930s have been shadowed by the mainstream of
assessments.
The background and real impetus for the creation of refugee protection system were
constituted by the refugee problems. In this respect, the 1920s was a unique era in the
history of Europe with the mass movements of homeless people. It all begun from
worries about the huge amounts of Russians crossing the borders, and soon it was
realized that there were even millions more, representing a variety on nationalities.
Despite all shortcomings of the League, refugee work was conducted during the two
decades under examination in this study. There was continuation throughout the whole
period in the efforts of international bodies. There was an international refugee regime
consisting of various actors of intergovernmental and non-governmental nature. The
existence of a regime refers to some kind of strategy. The references give us a reason
to believe that this regime had to be directed by the League of Nations, which, in turn,
leads us to find traces of consistency referring to a policy.
This study is a description and analysis of the evolution of the policy. It is evident
that scrutiny has to be divided in two separate periods: the 1920s as well as the 1930s.
It turns out that the first period was the time of reactive and ad hoc responses to the
emerging crises. During the following decade there was more organized, proactive, and
human rights based policy formulation. This project shows how the refugee work was
justified, initiated, formulated, developed, implemented, and financed. All this is policy,
if conducted in a consistent manner. There seems to exist enough continuation and
consistency in the activities during the whole period in order to justify the use of the
term policy.
The refugee policy of the world organizations was formulated, planned and
implemented by the Member States through the different Bodies of the League and the
ILO. This was done in close cooperation with Non-governmental organizations, private
sector and societies on the whole. The substance of the policy was guided by a
number of prominent personalities who were able to draw the attention of the
international community to the matters that otherwise would have been forgotten and
left to be handled by national governments alone.
Refugee agencies were able to play a successful leadership role for several
reasons. Unlike private organizations, their association with the League of Nations
gave them the authority to negotiate with governments directly. Because their
proposals were generally perceived as non-partisan, they were also more likely than
those from Great Powers to win a consensus. The most visible example of this was
definitely the achievement of creating a successful passport system.
It is fair to conclude that all the elements for a consistent policy were in place; the
purpose statements, applicability, scope, effective dates, responsibilities, and policy
statements. They were established in a form or another. They were not in a single
covering document, but, in retrospective, a policy document could be drawn up on the
basis of the compilation of the various documents and the practical work.
The refugee policy of the League of Nations was formulated and adopted in the top
organs of the world organization. It was planned and implemented in close cooperation
with other intergovernmental organization, non-governmental organizations, State
Members’ governments, as well as private sector and representatives of refugees.
The substance of the policy was guided by the refugee situations. The League faced
challenges throughout the whole period of time it conducted its refugee work. The
League was, however, able to respond and develop new solutions to the growing
challenges. The organization was capable of showing some creativeness in its
reactions to the refugee situations. Although the principles of the policies remained
somewhat unchanged, new techniques were applied in combating the destitution of
refugees.
Favorable economic development was the best tool against the destitution of
homeless people. That, in turn, made any excessive special arrangements for the
refugees unnecessary. In that sense we may conclude that the actual results of the
improvement in the position of the refugees were not exclusively achievements of the
refugee organizations. However, the organizations and the policy backing up their work
were most needed, when times were economically bad.
Although Fridtjof Nansen’s personal prestige was sometimes considered higher than
the appreciation of the League in some parts of the world and by some evaluators, it
can be concluded as a result of all deliberations conducted in this work, that the
refugee policy of the League and the ILO was consistent and a pertinent part of the
essence of the Organizations despite seeming inconsistencies.
ACRONYMS
ACPO = Advisory Committee of Private Organizations
ARC = American Red Cross
BRSC = Bulgarian Refugees Settlement Commission
CIAR = Committee on International Assistance to Refugees
CIRC = Comité International de la Croix-Rouge
CSO = Civil Society Organization
EK = Eduskunta (Parliament of Finland)
EKP = Etsivä Keskuspoliisi (Secret Police/Security Service of Finland in 1920s)
FRC = Finnish Red Cross
GB = Governing Body (of the ILO)
GRSC = Greek Refugees Settlement Commission
HC = High Commissioner
IGAC = Inter-Governmental Advisory Commission
IGCR = Intergovernmental Committee on Refugees
IGO = Inter-Governmental Organization
ILC = International Labour Conference
ILO = International Labour Organization
ILR = International Labour Review
INGO = International Non-Governmental Organization
LON = League of Nations
MFA = Ministry for Foreign Affairs (of Finland)
NGO = Non-Governmental Organization
NMF = Nansen Memorial Fund
NO = Nansen Office; Nansen International Office for Refugees
NSA = Non-State Actor
OB = Official Bulletin (ILO)
OFPRA = French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons
OJ = Official Journal (LON)
PMC = Permanent Mandates Commission (LON)
POW = Prisoner of War
RRC = Russian Red Cross
SCC = Special Council Committee
SPR = Suomen Punainen Risti (Finnish Red Cross)
SRAR = Subcommittee for the Resettlement of Assyrian Refugees
SRK = Svenska Röda Korset (Swedish Red Cross)
UM = Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland
VPAK(A) = State Refugee Assistance Centre (the Archives); Finland
VPR = Venäjän Punainen Risti/Russian Red Cross
YMCA = Young Men’s Christian Association
Description:High Commissioner for Refugees Fridtjof Nansen as he wrote in his report in Caucasus, North America and Europe during the past century.
