German President Steinmeier fires up the debate on reparations in Crete: Historic visit sparks controversy.
Reparations Debate: A Complex Legacy
Table of Contents
The visit of German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier to Greece has reignited discussions about World War II reparations. This long-standing issue continues to shape diplomatic relations between the two nations.
Greece’s claim for reparations stems from the brutal Nazi occupation during World War II. The country suffered immense losses, both in terms of human life and economic damage. Many Greek communities, particularly on the island of Crete, endured severe atrocities.
Key points of contention include:
- Legal status: Germany maintains the issue is legally settled through post-war agreements.
- Moral obligation: Greek leaders argue for acknowledgement of historic responsibility.
- Economic impact: The forced loan and destruction during occupation left lasting scars.
President Steinmeier’s itinerary includes a visit to Kandanos, a Cretan village that faced Nazi reprisals. This gesture may be seen as an acknowledgement of past suffering, though its implications remain unclear.
Greek political figures have taken different approaches:
- President Katerina Sakellaropoulou raised the reparations issue directly with Steinmeier.
- Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis emphasised moving forward while still noting the importance of addressing historical wrongs.
The Greek parliament’s 2019 resolution calling for active pursuit of reparations adds pressure on current and future governments to keep the issue alive.
Public sentiment in Greece remains strong, with many citizens and descendants of survivors feeling that justice has not been served. The emotional weight of wartime experiences continues to influence Greek perspectives on the matter.
German responses have evolved over time:
- Early post-war focus on rebuilding and integration
- Gradual increase in acknowledgements of Nazi crimes
- Current stance of legal settlement whilst expressing regret
This visit presents both challenges and opportunities for Greek-German relations. While economic ties have strengthened, particularly following Greece’s financial crisis, the reparations debate remains a sensitive undercurrent.
Potential outcomes of renewed discussions could include:
- Symbolic gestures of remembrance
- Increased cultural and educational exchanges
- Joint historical commissions
- Economic cooperation initiatives
The complexity of the issue lies in balancing legal interpretations, moral obligations, and the practical realities of modern international relations. As both nations continue to navigate this delicate topic, the path forward remains uncertain but crucial for regional stability and mutual understanding.
Historians’ Views on the 1941 Cretan Battle
The 1941 Battle of Crete has sparked debate among historians. Different interpretations exist regarding the events that unfolded during this World War II conflict. Some scholars emphasise the brutality of the Nazi invasion, whilst others focus on the strategic aspects of the operation.
The legal case at Rethymno in 2016 involving a German historian’s book on the subject highlights the sensitivity of this topic. The court’s decision to clear the author of charges related to his interpretation demonstrates the complexities surrounding historical analysis of wartime events.
He stood by his assertion that the Second World War prior to Operation Mercury (invasion of Crete) had been conducted in a comparatively ethical manner, with the opposing forces involved adhering to the rules of behaviour laid down in international law. He maintained that it was his task to convey his understanding of the historical events regardless of possible controversies.
Evidence:
1) The official war history of the Second World War of the Federal Republic of Germany, published by the ‘Centre for Military History and Social Sciences of the Bundeswehr’: Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg, 10 vols, vol.3, Der Mittelmeerraum und Südosteuropa 1940-1941: Von der ‘non belligeranza’ Italiens bis zum Kriegseintritt der Vereinigten Staaten).
2) Operation Merkur: Die Eroberung der Insel Kreta im Mai 1941. 2nd edition of 2011 (Peleus – Studien zur Archäologie und Geschichte Griechenlands und Zyperns; 54), pp. 254ff., 263-272, esp. 264, 267f. u. 271f. (Heinz A. Richter)
3) Responsible British and New Zealand officers (e.g. Major Bedding, 20 May 1941 at Kastelli, testimony of Brigadier Lindsay Inglis, commander of the 4th New Zealand Brigade, at the 1947 war crimes trial, etc.)
4) The Allied Tribunal at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials determined in the question of partisans that, according to the laws of war in force at the time (Hague Convention No. IV of 1907), the partisans in south-east Europe could not be regarded as lawful belligerents within the meaning of Article 1 of this Convention.
5) As regards hostage-taking and reprisals, the Nuremberg Tribunal concluded that, in certain circumstances, hostage-taking and reprisal executions may constitute a lawful method of combating guerrilla attacks. According to the Tribunal, the taking of hostages (and their killing in retaliation for guerrilla attacks) was subject to several conditions. The Tribunal also noted that both the British Manual of Military Law and the U.S. Basic Field Manual (Rules of Land Warfare) authorised retaliation against the civilian population. (The British manual did not mention killing, but the U.S. manual included killing as a possible retaliation).
Differing viewpoints persist on the actions of both German forces and Cretan resistance. These varied perspectives contribute to ongoing discussions about the battle’s significance and impact on the island’s population.
Legal Aspects of Greece’s War Compensation Claims Against Germany
The dispute over war reparations from Germany to Greece stems from the Second World War occupation. This complex issue involves historical, legal, and political dimensions that have persisted for decades.
During the German occupation of Greece from 1941, the occupying forces established a puppet government. This regime facilitated economic exploitation, including the imposition of exorbitant ‘occupation costs’. These costs far exceeded legitimate expenses allowed under international law. To justify continued plundering, some charges were reclassified as ‘reconstruction costs’.
The Bank of Greece was compelled to grant a forced loan to the German Reichsbank in 1942. It also had to surrender its foreign currency reserves. Only partial repayment of this loan occurred. German records from 1945 indicate an outstanding debt to Greece of 476 million Reichsmarks.
As the occupation neared its end, the German forces used the not uncommon tactic of ‘scorched earth’ to make it difficult for the enemy to utilise the vacated territory for military purposes. A notable example was the blockage of the Corinth Canal with locomotives and wagons from Greek railways.
The 1946 Paris Reparations Agreement set the framework for German reparations. Greece’s allocated share was estimated at 7.181 billion US dollars (in 1938 prices). The agreement stipulated that this would settle all claims against German state entities arising from the war. This included occupation costs and claims against clearing accounts and ‘Reich credit banks’.
Greek representatives signed the agreement in January 1946, but the Greek parliament only ratified it in December 1955. The agreement allowed Greece to utilise German foreign assets within its borders as part of the reparations. An Inter-Allied Reparations Agency oversaw the process and payments.
German reparations to Greece in the latter half of the 20th century comprised both goods and monetary payments. The 1954 Paris Treaties ended reparations from West Germany to former adversaries. Italy and Bulgaria committed to paying reparations to Greece separately.
As part of the reparations process, the Allies dismantled numerous German production facilities. Greece was allocated 30,000 tonnes of valuable machinery, including large rolling mills, machine tools, crane parts, and foundry equipment. However, only 11,500 tonnes were shipped to Piraeus in 1950. The remaining 18,500 tonnes initially stayed in Hamburg, with 16,000 tonnes later sold, scrapped, and shipped to England.
In addition to reparations, Germany agreed to further compensations. A 1960 treaty between West Germany and Greece provided 115 million Deutschmarks for Greek citizens affected by Nazi persecution based on race, faith, or ideology, and their survivors. This agreement was part of a series of global compensation agreements with Western nations and Austria.
The treaty and its ratification law were announced in West Germany in September 1961 and came into effect in October 1961. The Greek ratification and distribution law also considered resistance fighters for compensation. However, details of the distribution process remained unclear.
A diplomatic exchange accompanied the treaty signing. In a letter, the Greek side reserved the right to request settlement of additional claims arising from Nazi persecution during the war and occupation. This was to be considered in a general review under Article 5, Paragraph 2 of the 1953 Agreement on German External Debts.
It’s important to note that the official title of the 1960 agreement specifically addressed Greek nationals affected by Nazi persecution measures. This focus on individual suffering and claims distinguishes it from broader state-level reparations discussions.
Common Questions About German Reparations
What led to the debate on Germany’s Second World War reparations?
Germany’s occupation of Greece during World War II caused immense suffering and damage. The Nazi regime committed atrocities, looted resources, and destroyed infrastructure. This painful history forms the basis for Greece’s ongoing calls for compensation. The debate has resurfaced due to German President Steinmeier’s recent visit to Greece.
What views exist on Germany paying additional reparations to Greece?
Supporters argue that Greece deserves further compensation for wartime losses. They say previous payments were inadequate. Critics contend that legal agreements have settled the matter. They point to Germany’s post-war aid to Greece. Both sides acknowledge the moral complexities involved.
How have German leaders addressed reparations claims?
Recent German officials have expressed remorse for Nazi crimes but maintain that reparations are legally resolved. During his visit, President Steinmeier asked for forgiveness on Germany’s behalf. However, he reiterated Germany’s stance that no further payments are due.
How does the reparations issue affect German-Greek relations?
The debate creates tension but hasn’t derailed bilateral ties. Both nations emphasise moving forward while respecting the past. Greek leaders raise the issue in meetings with German counterparts. Yet they also highlight positive developments in relations, such as economic cooperation.
What is the international response to the reparations debate?
Most countries have not taken official positions on Greek claims. The issue is seen as a bilateral matter between Greece and Germany. Some observers note its relevance to broader discussions on historical justice and reconciliation.
What legal factors shape the reparations claim?
Key considerations include:
- Post-war treaties and agreements
- Statute of limitations on such claims
- Precedents in international law
- Germany’s prior reparations and aid
