Date post: | 07-Apr-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | ben-rogaczewski |
View: | 220 times |
Download: | 0 times |
of 21
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
1/21
U[IVX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX]
YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX]YMSTEWH
JKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^
\GZFRQU[IVX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU
[IVX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX]YM
STEWHJKLNOX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU
[IVX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX]YM
STEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\G
ZFRQU[IVX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[
IVX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX]YMS
TEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\G
ZFRQVX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX
]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX]YMSTE
WHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFR
QU[IVX]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX
]YMSTEWHJKLNOP^\GZFRQU[IVX]YMSTE
Romania for Romanians?The Ambivalent Definition of Romanias Jews
Benjamin Rogaczewski
Dr. Lisa Silverman
Holocaust and Memory
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
2/21
2
About a year and a half ago, I had the pleasure of taking a holiday in Romania. I
was studying abroad in Rome at the time, and in fact, when I told one of my professors at
John Cabot University that I was spending a winter break in Romania, he asked me
why? The question was not so much concerned with the actual reason for my visit to
Romania, but rather the question of why would anyone want to go to Romania? I
wanted to see something different, something other than Western Europe. Considering
Romania was close enough to post-Communist Europe, I was guaranteed to see
something completely different, to enter a world I had never seen before. I must confess
that before going to Romania, my main concerns were to find trappings of VladTepes,
also known as VladDraculya. What I did not realize is that I would be traveling where the
Holocaust had taken place. I did not know anything about Romania and its involvement
with the Holocaust, and considered the Holocaust to be an affair within Central Europe,
rather than the Balkans.
While in Sighisoara, I had the chance to speak with a young Romanian, who I
found out was named after governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. After talking about
different cultural aspects, I brought up the topic of the gypsies. Arnold seemed to be
disgusted by the gypsies, stating that they should be removed from the country. He
even claimed that tourism would have increased if not for the gypsies. Looking back
upon the conversation, I could see faint similarities between modern prejudice against the
Roma, or gypsy population within Romania, and that of the anti-Semitism of interwar
Romania. An idea spreads from prejudice and the youth confess and profess it.
In my final days within Cluj-Napoca, the capital of Transylvania, I decided to see
a production ofTurandot at the National theatre. Sitting in a box seat, looking down upon
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
3/21
3
the stage and the people, all the while I never thought that perhaps an Iron Guardist
stood on that stage professing anti-Semitism and Romanization. With the rise of the
curtain, I noticed after watching a few minutes of the play, that I was not watching
Turandot. Rather, it was a comedy mocking Communism. I could understand little parts
of the dialogue, but the scene I had seen showed a Communist soldier getting information
from his informant, a drunken country bumpkin. No doubt a farce upon the previous
Communist regime.
Everywhere I went I heard tales of the Communist regime and the proud collapse
of said regime. I saw proud nationalism everywhere, from the tricolored flags waving, to
the Ursus
beer I drank. I would never have even guessed the Holocaust had a place
among such proud people with a rich culture. I never thought about the fact that the
railroad tracks I had been using could have carried freightcars full of Jews, or the fact that
I could have been in a pub where members of the Iron Guard had met to discuss matters,
or drink to their Captain Codreanu. In a way, my study of Romanias Holocaust has
revisioned my memories of Romania. Certainly not the people, who I found to be some
of the nicest people I have ever met. It is a revision of the importance of where I had
been, and who had been there before I had arrived.
The argument of my paper is that since anti-Semitism in Romania wasfor the
most part ambivalent and static, the definition of Jew was ambivalent and static as
well. Romania was under three kinds of anti-Semitism before and during WWII.
When A.C. Cuza took control of the Romanian government, his Romanian anti-
A famous beer of Cluj.
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
4/21
4
Semitism became policy adopted by Cuzas successors. However, since each of the
new governments took control, each added their own ideals. For example, when the
Iron Guard took power, they kept anti-Semitism within the government; but
stressed an attack on all minorities. When Ion Antonescu took control of the
government, he adopted NicolaeIorgas notions of anti-Semitism, utilizing it for anti-
Communist purposes.
Therefore, certain Jews were targeted above other Jews. In addition, a
xenophobic sentiment became the adopted norm, and so other minorities were
persecuted along with the Jews. Strangely enough, this did not end friendships in
places such as Bucharest. For the most part relationships remained the same, albeit
strained. However, Jews in Moldavia were targeted as Judeo-Communists, bearing
the full brunt of the Romanian Holocaust. This is not to say that anti-Semitic
legislation did not take place in areas like Bucharest, anti-Semitic legislation being
national policy, all Jews were affected by the legislations forbidding higher
education, the possession of radios, and the right to hold office.1 However, when
considering pogroms, or other anti-Semitic acts of violence within Romania, no
other region in Romania contains more pogroms than Moldavia. As for modern day
historians, Romanian anti-Semitism affects the historiography of Romanias
Holocaust. My paper will also stress this affect and the detriment of said affect.
The first part will examine the origins of Romanian anti-Semitism in Iasi with
A.C. Cuza, NicolaeIorga, and Codreanu. The second part will examine the diary of
Mihail Sebastian, a Jewish playwright, for his connection with Iron Guardists of
1 Randolph L. Braham, ed., The Tragedy of Romanian Jewry, ed. Randolph L. Braham(New York, New York: Columbia University Press, 1994). P. 119.
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
5/21
5
Bucharest. The third and final part will examine the historiography of Ion
Antonescu, and how A.C. Cuzas Romanian anti-Semitism, essentially anti-
Communism, affects the historiography. When finished with this examination of
Romanian anti-Semitism, I hope that the read receives an enlightening outlook on
Romania, as much as I was enlightened with the research.
Part I: The Origin of Romanian Anti-Semitism
Of the 756,930 Jews reported in the 1930 Romanian census, more than
160,000 lived in Moldavia, the northeastern region bordering the Ukraine.2
According to Raphael Vago, the Jews of Moldavia resembled an Eastern type of
Jewry, in both religious practice and distinctive clothing.3 It is no surprise than that
the region of Moldavia was suspected to be inhabited by Judeo-Bolsheviks.4 It was
men like A.C. Cuza, CorneliuCodreanu and NicolaeIorga, who gathered the prejudice
of anti-Semitism, and rallying under xenophobia and anti-Communism.
A.C. Cuzawas raised in Moldavia taught at the university of Iasi. Called the
oldest and most virulent of Romanian anti-Semites5, Cuza taught his anti-Semitic
view to his students, and defended their own anti-Semitic actions. On November 10,
1926, a group of Jewish students was put on trial. During the trial, a student in the
crowd shot one of the Jewish students, killing the student. The student who shot the
2 Ibid. pgs. 32-33.3 Ibid. p. 31.4 Ibid. p. 17.5 Eugen Weber, "The Men of the Archangel,"Journal of Contemporary History1, no. 1(1966): 101-126. P. 114.
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
6/21
6
Jewish student was N. Totu. At Totus trial, Cuza defended Totu, stating, Totu does
deserve to be condemned, but rather to be canonized for all time to come.6Cuza
taught anti-Semitism to his students, such as CorneliuCodreanu, but his views on
anti-Semitism were different from Codreanus, or even Cuzas compatriot,
NicolaeIorga. For both Cuza and Iorga, nationalism was the song of the pulpits.
However, Iorga was on an anti-Semite on the fence. On one hand, he is know to have
coined the nationalistic phrase Romania for Romanians, and only Romanians;
while on the other hand, Iorga delivered statements such as
In the evening the decree to suppress the Jewish pressis published. Unfortunately, it is founded on a totally
unacceptable doctrine. You cannot createlegalprinciples through ministerial decisions alone. I am
extremely determined to bring this matter to the
attention of the King. I could not stay on in a countryguided by such principles.7
NicolaeIorga was an anti-Semite, but he was an anti-Semite in a country in
which anti-Semitism was socially accepted. This does not excuse the matter, but
explains this nature and the nature of the country Iorga lived in. However, Iorga
differs from Cuza in manner of morals and ethics. Where Iorga was willing to give
audience to a Jewish electorate, Cuza would rarely give the time of day to a Jew.8So
on one hand we have the militant monomaniacal anti-Semitism of A.C. Cuza, and on
the other we have the ambivalent, non-violent anti-Semitism of NicolaeIorga.
6 I. C. Butnaru, The Silent Holocaust: Romania and Its Jews (Westport, Connecticut:
Greenwood Press, 1992). P. 42.7 Radu Ioanid, "Nicolae Iorga and Fascism,"Journal of Contemporary History27, no. 3
(July 1992): 467-492. P. 477.8 Ibid. p. 474.
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
7/21
7
For the most part, nationalism remained the focus of both ideals. To
NicolaeIorga, a Bolshevik could never be Romanian; to A.C. Cuza, a Jew could never
be a Romanian. For both men, nationalism and a new sense of Romanianism were
the focal point. However, in this case, Iorga was an anti-Communist, and Cuza was
an anti-Semite. Iorgas worry regarding Jews and Bolshevism was the influence of
Bolshevik mysticism on foreigners, especially on the Jews.9However, it was Cuzas
protg, CorneliuCodreanu, who would combine both ideals to create this new sense
of Romanianism, or Romanian anti-Semitism.
CorneliuCodreanu, like his mentors in reading (Iorga) and teaching (Cuza),
was raised in Iasi, the capital of Moldavia. Codreanu, raised by a rabid anti-Semitic
father, essentially created the Legion of Archangel Michael based upon the ideals
of these men. However, due to Codreanus actions, Cuza did not back up his protg,
and so Cuza and Codreanu split. While Codreanu recruited numerous members to
the Legion, Cuza had joined with Octavian Goga to create the Goga-Cuza Party; a
party which was not as popular as Codreanus new movement. Although many
Romanians had an anti-Semitic feeling of some sort, the Jewish Problem was not
the only issue for Romanians, or even one of the highest priorities. Therefore,
Codreanucombined a multitude of prejudices under one roof: Romanianism.
Combining both ideals of Cuza and Iorga, Codreanu believed in a Romania cleansed
off all minorities, including the Hungarians of Transylvania, the Bolsheviks of
9 Ibid. p. 475.
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
8/21
8
Moldavia, and of course the Jews of Romania.10Although the movement was popular,
the chaotic violence of Codreanus Legion spelled its doom and sealed its fate.
As the Legion grew in number and popularity, unrest grew as well. When
Codreanus mystic inspired Legion began to infect city life, Iorga spoke out against
the Legions atrocities
I tell them that they are leading the country towards aprecipice with their timid permissiveness: Codreanu
marched like a king behind the hearse, the crowd
dropped to its knees and crossed itself. You must takeaction before the killings resume.11
The action of the Romanians Iorga is referring to show a mystified and
manipulated people. Clearly, a lack of control of the government, creating a sense of
anarchy within Romania, allowed Codreanus Legion to gain power. Even though
Codreanus Legion was dissolved, the government officials could not stop Codreanu
from creating a vehicle of anti-Semitic atrocities: The Iron Guard.
When King Carol II arrested Codreanu, along with several other Iron
Guardists, and had them killed, the Romanian government believed they had
destroyed the Iron Guard for good. However, as I approach in the next part, the
ghost of Codreanu would haunt Romania, long after his death. A.C. Cuza relaxed his
grip on the leash of a mad dog, and Romania would pay for it.
Part II: The Iron Guard Sentiment of Bucharest
10 Eugen Weber, "The Men of the Archangel,"Journal of Contemporary History1, no.1 (1966): 101-126. P. 117.11 Radu Ioanid, "Nicolae Iorga and Fascism,"Journal of Contemporary History27, no.3 (July 1992): 467-492. P. 485.
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
9/21
9
When the Iron Guard found a stable headquarters in Bucharest, pro-Guard
sentiments began to rise within the capital. Ion Antonescu was friends with
Codreanu, and after Antonescu rose to power through the abdication of Carol II, the
Iron Guard was given special placement in Antonescus circle.However, our focus is
not necessarily on the Iron Guard or Ion Antonescu at this moment. Our focus is a
Jewish playwright of Bucharest named Mihail Sebastian. It is Sebastians friendships
with prominent Iron Guardists of Bucharest, even though he himself is a Jew.
Mihail Sebastian was born IosifHechter, but changed his name to hide his
Jewish ties. A poet, playwright and novelist, Sebastian writes his diary with an
eloquent touch. However, his early entries do not leave the reader with a sense of
fear from the anti-Semitism within Bucharest. Perhaps he sees this as a
commonality, a passing fad not worth worrying about. When he does bring up
notions of fear, those feelings are immediately replaced with a sense of urgency
towards other aspects of his life such as the productions of his plays, and his
plentiful love life. However, one main theme flows throughout Sebastians entries:
his strange relationship with anti-Semites. The anti-Semitism imposed by the
political factors of interwar Bucharest clearly affects this theme.
Sebastian describes the different political changes within Romania between
1935 and 1944 very well. Beginning with the anti-Semitic Cuza-Goga government
set up by King Carol II, the reader is introduced to Sebastians circle of friends.
These include NaeIonescu, the Iron Guard Ideologist; MirceaEliade, a pro-Iron Guard
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
10/21
10
writer; and CamilPetrescu, a pro-Iron Guard writer. Each one of these friends shows
animosity towards Jews, but never towards Sebastian personally.
With NaeIonescu, Sebastian gives the impression of a student dignifying his
mentor. However, there are moments when Sebastian clearly denounces his
mentors actions. One such example shows:
Nae has signed a declaration of solidarity with the 318comrades from Vaslui. A facsimile of the text appeared
in all the morning papers. When I saw Naes
handwriting in the pictureclear, decisive, almostprint-quality writing that I know so well.12
Even though Ionescu wrote Sebastian an incredibly degrading, anti-Semitic
preface to his novel De douamii de ani, Sebastian still mourned his professors death
in March of 1940. Ionescu suffered illness due to his internment within prison for
his connections with the Iron Guard.
Camil, Sebastians other friend, was anti-Semitic but to a point. One
memorable situation from Sebastians diary shows a humorous situation.
You ought to see how the Jews have overrun the Corso.
The whole caf is full of them. Theyve really takenpossession
What an anti-Semite you are, Camil! Come with me and
Ill show you how wrong you are.I took him by the arm. We went into the Corse, did a
tour of the caf, stopped at each table, and counted up
the suspect faces. In all, there were fifteen Jews in alively and jam-packed caf full of groups heatedly
arguing. With a smile, Camil took everything back.13
12 Mihail Sebastian,Journal: 1935-1944 (Chicago, Illinois: Ivan R. Dee, 2000). P. 192.13 Ibid. p. 150.
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
11/21
11
Each deliverance is given as if between two close friends, and as such, the
anti-Semitism is not taken seriously. However, when it comes to the anti-Semitism
given by Sebastians friend Mircea, it is taken with the utmost seriousness.
Mircea is quite possibly the one friend who Sebastian speaks about the most.
When the Iron Guard becomes a prominent political group within Romania, Mircea
joins the group. Sebastian, upon hearing this, describes Mircea as neither a
charlatan nor a madman. He is just nave. But there are such catastrophic forms of
naivete!14. Although he does not agree with Mirceas decision to join the rabidly
anti-Semitic political group, he continues to be his friend. When King Carol II began
to arrest Iron Guardists for their involvement in the assassination of the Prime
Minister, Sebastian was at Mirceas home to make sure he was all right.
However, when the anti-Semitic legislations are set in place, and rumors
spread equating Jews with Communists, Sebastians friendship with Mircea slowly
dissolves. Sebastian writes many times throughout the diary about how sad he is
that Mircea will no longer contact him. On the other hand, though, after the murder
of the Iron Guard leader, CorneliuCodreanu, there seems to be rehabilitation to their
friendship. Sebastian writes
This morning at the Foundation, Mircea was in a groupwith Cioculescu, Biberi, and Benador. I went up to say
hello and, to my surprise, Mircea stood up and
embraced me.15
Beyond all of these moments, it can clearly be seen that the anti-Semitic
feelings brought on by political means caused a great rift within the social structure
14 Mihail Sebastian,Journal: 1935-1944 (Chicago, Illinois: Ivan R. Dee, 2000). p. 114.15 Ibid p. 192.
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
12/21
12
of Sebastians friendships. However, the strange friendship between enemies of
ideals brings about the question of what the Iron Guard considers a Jew. Obviously
to the Iron Guard, Sebastians Jewish heritage was not an issue. Otherwise, if it had
been an issue, Sebastians friends would have ostracized him. Therefore, a
distinction must be made.
When the Iron Guard brought its anti-Semitic ideals into Bucharest, it also
brought along its ambivalence, as well. The ability to target certain Jews as
foreigners came from Codreanus xenophobic and anti-Bolshevik tendencies.
However, as was stated before, Codreanus violence created the undesired chaos
within Romania, and so the Iron Guard was dissembled after the failed January Iron
Guard Revolution. Once the rebellion was quelled, Ion Antonescu was free to take
complete control over Romania, and forge a new sense of Romanianism.
Part III: The Rehabilitation of Ion Antonescu-A Survey of Historiography
When Antonescu took control of Romania, he did not adopt the anti-Semitism
of A.C. Cuza or the Iron Guard. The people of Romania had spent long enough
amongst the chaos of the Iron Guard, and A.C. Cuzas sense of anti-Semitism was not
at all beneficial to Antonescus regime. Antonescu saw NicolaeIorgas ideas on anti-
Semitism as the best fit for his new government for several reasons. First, the Iron
Guard murdered NicolaeIorga. With the Iron Guard disassembled and dishonored,
who better to exemplify than the martyred nationalist, NicolaeIorga. Second, with
Hitlers commencement of the invasion of the Soviet Union, Antonescu needed a
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
13/21
13
common enemy to rally his Romanian troops. Iorgas sense of anti-Semitism
stemmed from a fear of Judeo-Bolsheviks. If one was a Bolshevik, one was not a
Romanian. Essentially, Ion Antonescu adopted NicolaeIorgas sense of anti-
Semitism. This explains why certain Jews under Antonescus control of Romania
were targeted as Judeo-Bolsheviks, why Jews such as Mihail Sebastian held
relationships with prominent anti-Semites, and why Antonescu was able to
negotiate or listen to prominent Jews with concerns. This also gave the most
evidence and reason for rehabilitation of Ion Antonescu.
When the Antonescu regime fell in 1944, and King Mihail handed Ion
Antonescu over to Soviet forces, Communism laid its claim upon the politics of
Romania. Unfortunately, this affected Romanias Holocaust history as well.
No one in Romania, not even the Jews, could know how Soviet-Communism
would affect the Holocaust within Romania. Once Communism became the political
norm, Romanian history concerningthe Holocaust was written with the Communist
pen. The Soviets were declared the heroes within the post-war history books, while
the Jews were left out as the victims. Rather, a nameless group was persecuted by
the fascist and anti-Communist leaders of Romania. Closing the archives to
historians and specialists, no one was allowed to study the Holocaust within
Romania, nor the documents written by the previous anti-Communist regime. For
decades, young Romanians were taught about their previous dictators, the role of
the savior Soviets, but not Romanias involvement with the European Holocaust.
Romanians were led to believe that there was in fact no Holocaust in Romania at all,
and that the figures pertaining to the drastic change in population among the Jews, a
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
14/21
14
mere falsification of the census conducted by the Antonescu regime. For decades,
the Jews of Romania were forgotten, a collective shadow displaced amongst the
linear history of Romania.
With the fall of Communism in 1991 for Romania, Romanians could breath
easily for once, basking in nationalism from the revolution. It should be noted that
Romania was one of the few, if not the only country under a Communist regime that
rose up in revolution resulting in the death of the Communist leader, a fact that the
modern-day Romanians profess proudly. The Holocaust historians were also glad
for the fall. For the first time in years, historians could view documents from the
Romanian archives. For the first time in years, the Jews would be remembered as
the victims of degradation comparable, if not worse, than that of the Nazi
persecutions of the Jews. However, these newly founded pieces of evidence raised a
great issue of historiography: How to convey the Holocaust in Romania, and how to
write about those who perpetrated the Holocaust of Romania, such as
IonAntonescu? Antonescu especially has been placed within the spotlight recently
and with great fervor.
Many modern Romanians claim Antonescu as a Romanian hero, and a
warrior of anti-Communism. The rehabilitation and revision of Antonescus place
within Holocaust history creates several issues including a surge of Holocaust Denial
within Romania. Liberation from Communism gave Antonescu the right to historical
revision due to his anti-Communist regime. This study examines different written
histories of Antonescus regime, some from the revisionist side, and that of the
standard narrative.
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
15/21
15
The Silent Holocaust: Romania and its Jews by I.C. Butnaru
Within Butnarus examination of Romanias Holocaust, a linear narrative of
the Holocaust is given. Beginning with the origin of Jews within ancient Dacia, and
followed by the rise of anti-Semitism within the Balkans. Butnaru then goes onward
to speak about the origins of protagonists of anti-Semitism within Romania,
including CorneliuCodreanu, the leader of the Iron Guard, a fascist group of Hitler
admirers inspired by NicolaeIorgas slogan Romania for Romanians, and only for
Romanians.16 While focusing upon the origins of Romanias contribution to the
Holocaust, Butnaru notes the changes of political regimes within interwar Romania,
from the Goga-Cuza government to Antonescus regime. The main purpose of
Butnarus book is to show an honest presentation of what he considers the truth.
Considering Butnaru was in a Romanian labor camp during the Antonescu regime,
his narrative gives an honest picture of the situation in Romania, although his
emotions are very much present within the narrative. As for his views on anti-
Semitism, Butnaru claims that
Anti-Semitism in Romania was not a product of thepeople, but of the leaders and the so-called intellectual
elite.17
As the narrative explains throughout, Butnaru puts much blame upon
professors such as NaeIonescu and A.C. Cuza who taught their anti-Semitic lessons
16 I. C. Butnaru, The Silent Holocaust: Romania and Its Jews (Westport, Connecticut:
Greenwood Press, 1992). P. 37.17 Ibid p. xix.
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
16/21
16
to the youths at their universities, spreading Iron Guardist ideas. To Butnaru, it is
the teachings of these professors, which create the flame of political anti-Semitism.
Butnaru does not give too much about Antonescu, and rather concerns his
work with the actions and ideas of the Iron Guard; the Romanian army, of which
there were many Iron Guardists; and members of Antonescus cabinet, such as
MihaiAntonescu. Within his preface however, Butnaru refers to Antonescu as a
fascist dictator, and brings up Antonescus collaboration with the Iron Guard, and
Antonescus involvement with the Iasi pogrom and the deportations of Transnistria.
Butnaru places Antonescu directly within the Bucharest pogrom of 1941, also
known as the Legionary Revolution, stating that Antonescu knew about the
Legionary revolt when it began, but did not try to stop the pogrom. Antonescu had
called Hitler to see what actions he was to take. Hitler advised him to stop the revolt
immediately, but Antonescu, needing the revolt to secure his authority, waited for
three days before sending in the army to quell the rebellion.18
From this view of Antonescu, we see a leader who does not care for the
concern of the Jews, but rather is concerned with his control of Romania. This idea is
upheld through the writings of Mihail Sebastian, giving the view of Antonescu as an
opportunist seizing power through the abdication of the throne, and a waffling anti-
Semite. This view of Antonescu changes slightly with the revisionist histories.
Hitlers Forgotten Ally by Dennis Deletant
18 I. C. Butnaru, The Silent Holocaust: Romania and Its Jews (Westport, Connecticut:Greenwood Press, 1992). Pgs. 82-83.
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
17/21
17
Deletant gives the most recent revisionist view of Antonescus regime and
focuses more upon Antonescus relationship with Hitler, and how it does not define
Antonescus regime. Within his introduction, Deletant states that he is concerned
with the labeling of Antonescus regime as fascist, based around the fact that
Hitlers regime was considered fascist. Going against this labeling, Deletant states
that Antonescu led the fascist Legionary state for five months before the Legionary
Revolution ended in January of 1941. After this moment in history, Antonescu led a
dictatorship, which according to Deletant was not necessarily fascist. Deletant also
focuses on Romanias joining of the Axis powers as an inevitability, claiming that in
order to keep Russia out of Romania, Antonescu had to join Hitlers Axis powers.
When concerning Antonescu with the Holocaust in Romania, Deletant gives a
balanced view of Antonescus regime. He acknowledges that Antonescus regime
was responsible for the deaths of between 250,000 and 290,000 Jews, but also gives
credit to the 375,000 Jews saved from the death camps of Poland.19Deletant explains
that this was due to Antonescus wish to retain Romanias sovereignty in the affair.
Whatever the reason, it is true that Antonescudid not go along with the Nazi partys
Final Solution, but still wished to rid Romania of its internal enemy, the Jews.
Deletant gives a further revisionist view of Antonescu within his book.
Antonescuis seen as a rationally concerned leader within the state, whether he is an
anti-Semite or not. In one major statement, Antonescu stated at a meeting
19 Dennis Deletant, Hitler's Forgotten Ally: Ion Antonescu and His Regime, Romania1940-1944 (New York, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006). P. 2.
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
18/21
18
If we remove the Jews, this enormous void is created in
the Romanian economy, which produce a general,irreparable catastrophe for our state and its recovery
will be impossible.20
Rather than deporting all of the Jews right away, Antonescu realizes the
importance of the Jewish population to the economy. However, since the Jews were
the greatest minority of Romania, this perhaps gives breadth to the stereotype of the
rich Jew, a common stereotype allowing Romanians to state that economic
downturns were the result of Jewish thieves.
As for Antonescus contribution to anti-Semitism, Deletant gives us the view
that Antonescu was not inheritantly anti-Semitic himself, but rather adopted anti-
Semitism, which had become political policy during his rise to power. Antonescu
does have a history of aiding Jews, while it is incongruent since he was the dictator
to persecute them. With Antonescus concern of the death trains, Antonescu
explained them to be humanitarian stating
It is a military principle: along the front and in the
proximity to it the civilian population must be moved. It
was a measure taken for the political security of thestate, a question of military scrutiny and of military
operations and even a matter of saving their lives. MrPresident, had I left them [the Jews] there where they
were, not one of them would be alive today.21
20 Ibid. p. 107.21 Ibid. p. 132.
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
19/21
19
The irony of this statement is that if he had not moved them, they wouldhave
survived. Instead, out of several thousand, only 824 Jews survived the death
trains, being tried and found innocent of crimes against the state.22
The revisionist view of Ion Antonescus regime by Deletant sheds some
positive light upon where Antonescu lies in Holocaust history. The work does not
extinguishAntonescus involvement in the Holocaust. Rather, it shows some ways I
which Antonescu rationally considered Jews to be human beings, while still
adhering to some of the Nazi ideals, albeit loosely. For example, Deletant brings up
the legislation in which the Jews of Romania had to wear a distinctive mark, i.e. the
Star of David. However, after Dr. Wilhelm Filderman, referred playfully as the Jews
Fuhrer, spoke with Antonescu to prohibit the distinctive mark, Antonescu cancelled
the distinctive mark, with the exception of Transnitria.23 This exception is no doubt
allied with Antonescus feelings of anti-Communism along with anti-Semitism,
considering Transnistria bordered Communist territory.
Anti-Semitism continues to be a problem for many places affected by the
Holocaust. With a place Romania, some historians have issues with the geography of
Romania, since sections of the country were annexed. This changes many scholars
view of a Romanian Jew. However, the thing to look at is who killed those Jews, not
so much, where the Jews had died. The Romanians began their countrys Holocaust
based upon an ever-changing idea, this sense of Romanianism. This sense shows
us the dangers of things like nationalism and xenophobia. With my own studies, I
22 I. C. Butnaru, The Silent Holocaust: Romania and Its Jews (Westport, Connecticut:Greenwood Press, 1992). P. 98.23 Dennis Deletant, Hitler's Forgotten Ally: Ion Antonescu and His Regime, Romania1940-1944 (New York, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006). p. 114.
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
20/21
20
found that Romania had experienced three types of anti-Semitisms, based around
the three nationalists that created them: A.C. Cuza, CorneliuCodreanu, and
NicolaeIorga. All of these different types of anti-Semitism affected the Jewish
population of Romania differently, as the definition of Jew changed as well. This
allowed the ambivalent nature of anti-Semitism to remain within Romania.
Unfortunately, this same ambivalent nature allows Romanian anti-Semitism to
survive in todays age. As historians of Romanias involvement in the Holocaust take
up historiography, issues arise from the chance of exonerating me who allowed the
deaths of thousands of Jews. Whether these men can be exonerated is questionable.
The deaths and memories of the Jews of Romania are unquestionable.
8/6/2019 Romania for Romanians?
21/21
21
Bibliography
Braham, Randolph L., ed. The Tragedy of Romanian Jewry. New York, New York:
Columbia University Press, 1994.
Butnaru, I. C. The Silent Holocaust: Romania and Its Jews. Westport, Connecticut:
Greenwood Press, 1992.
Deletant, Dennis. Hitler's Forgotten Ally: Ion Antonescu and His Regime, Romania1940-1944. New York, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.
Ioanid, Radu. "Nicolae Iorga and Fascism."Journal of Contemporary History27, no. 3
(July 1992): 467-492.
Ioanid, Radu. "The Holocaust in Romania: The Iasi Pogrom of June 1941."
Contemporary European History(Cambridge University Press) 2 (July 1993): 119-
148.
Sebastian, Mihail.Journal: 1935-1944. Chicago, Illinois: Ivan R. Dee, 2000.
Weber, Eugen. "The Men of the Archangel."Journal of Contemporary History1, no. 1
(1966): 101-126.
Yavetz, Zvi. "An Eyewitness Note: Reflections on the Rumanian Iron Guard."Journalof Contemporary History(Sage Publications, Ltd.) 26 (September 1991): 597-610.