"It's too late for Germany" (but not for Poland)

Easy with categorical statement like that. In this case you got it wrong.

It's explained here - auswaertiges-amt.de/en/aussenpolitik/themen/internatrecht/entschaedigung-node

Basically, it was the Western Allies that enacted legislation (in the Trizone as it was at the time) that forced the later Federal Republic to pay up as the legal successor to the Trizone. The deal paying Israel seems to have come about as a clear threat from the Allies - either they paid, or the Federal Republic would remain occupied. You'd have to ask the Allies why they didn't demand similar deals for other countries, though I suspect it was because they'd learnt the lesson from Versailles.

Personally, I'd like to see Poland bring a court case on the matter. It would set a nice precedent in international law as to whether a non-successor state can be liable for war reparations.

@Ironside


Again, you lack the historical knowledge on the matter. Back then basically all the Polish newspapers were demanding that a final agreement on the border was needed. If I remember it correctly, there were even polls which supported it. The Polsih did what they did in accordance of the wishes of the Polish people.

@delphiandomine


As you said, the Versailles experience was still present. Germany's Western neighbours also received various financial accomodations during the inception of the EEG.

Reparations to Poland were because of several reasons unthinkeable. Back then there was a wide consensus among Germans that the Eastern border was far from final. Some suggested that Poland should keep the area, but pay compensation to Germany for the lost property. Others demanded a revision of the border. Any settlement with Poland should change the status quo in some way towards Germany, not Poland. Nobody believed that Poland should get any reparations.

The reality of the Cold War was probably the biggest factor. Poland was a potential enemy, the SU was deemed as the biggest threat to the Western World. On that even the Wedtern Allies agreed. You are not paying bns to your biggest enemy so that he can build more tanks which he can use to conquer you.

Israel was a special case for several reasons, some of which you already mentioned. It was also because of the personal conviction of Adenauer, that the payments were so generous. He fought hard against his own party to succeed here.

Merkel is still almost being held prisoner by her nation's recent past and therefore doesn't wish to seem too much of a German nationalist. For this reason,

she's aiming in the opposite direction by trying (unsuccessfully) to create a melting-pot society modeled after the US, while forgetting that it can't work in Germany.

Who DOES want to see to much of a German nationalist?

Just imagine all these foreign nationalists lamenting the lack of visible german nationalism...like flag waving parades...tantrums...attacks at foreign countries....unreasonable demands....when such a german nationalists came to power in Berlin...oh how they would cry..."dominating Germany" would be the least of their problems.

Hypocrits, the whole lot!

Sarazzin's proud of being German, add to the rather extensive list, Messrs. Gauland and Hoecke. I think the latter especially would be the first to admit to being

a nationalist.

Believe it or not, most Germans are proud to be Germans... ;)

Not unthinkingly, I hope:-)

I'd argue that it was needed, because although the Federal Republic had taken on the international commitments of East Germany, there was some logic in that the final border settlement had to be made by Germany as a whole, comparable to the Final Settlement being ratified by Germany as one. The Final Settlement did explicitly demand that Germany accept the Oder-Neisse border, but because Poland wasn't a signatory to that agreement, it made sense to establish a separate treaty with Poland.

Now, where it gets interesting legally is when you consider where the Border Treaty came from. It was clearly required by the Unification Treaty, which in turn derived its legitimacy from the Basic Law of the Federal Republic. The Basic Law in turn got its legitimacy from the Potsdam Agreements, which clearly established that the German Reich was dead and that no successor state existed.

Any claim to repatriations would hinge on an international court finding that German sovereignty continued beyond 8th May 1945. The chances of that are slim to none, especially given that the Allies consistently upheld that they were the ones responsible for the territory now known as the Federal Republic of Germany. The Flensburg Government was never internationally recognised, nor did it have the key components of sovereignty.

There's an argument that says that sovereignty only ends when all structures cease to exist - not only the loss of territory, but also actions must be taken to eliminate what existed of the state. The Allies certainly did just that.

But interestingly your whole argument rests with the "Allies" being a legitimate independent legal entity The problem is Russia was part of that agreement, and as we all know they swallowed up a independent nation (Poland) so the argument is that their rulings were unfair and biased given the Russians as an Allie was a hostile occupying force in Poland.

Now given that the United nations was founded in the same year one could argue that ant treaty should have been agreed there, and not by a random few nations with their own agendas, especially the Ruskies who had enslaved Poland.

Interesting huh.

Delph do you mind not using allies because it involves the Ruskies who had simultaneously invaded Poland as part of a pact with Germany, just a polite request but in means a great deal to us Poles.

Actually I'm not sure if the war is over for Poland, was the legitimate Polish government in exile party ever a signatory to any agreements that involved Poland at that time ?

Why is not Italy not considered an Allie, after all they did the same as the ruskies and changed sides?

Delphie can not change the historical facts. The four (though only really 3, but 4 France was also admitted) Great Powers who won WWII shaped the post-war order and laid the legal framework for the aftermath. They were the ones who were responsible for the aftermath in Germany, because the Third Reich had unconditionally surrendered to them. They also controlled Poland, so obviously any agreement would involve them.


You are right. All the previous agreements were only concerning the FRG and GDR, but not a reunited Germany. However Polish zeal was not really needed, since it was always clear that a reunited Germany would sign a permanent agreement. However Poland wanted that Kohl signed an agreement before reunification took place, which Kohl wisely declined (because he knew that such an agreement could be legally questionable).

And what about Greece? Greece's case seems to be an interesting one in the context of Poland's claims for reparations from Germany ...

A report of a special committee of the Greek parliament which was being prepared for several years says that Germany should pay Greece 299 billion euros in compensation for destruction, robberies and economic exploitation during the occupation of the country by the Third Reich in 1941-1944]. In addition, Germany must also repay 11 billion EUR to the Central Bank of Greece - this is the loan amount (including interest accruing for 75 years) which Reichsbank borrowed in the Bank of Greece in 1943 and later did not return.

This "invoice for occupation" was drawn up on the basis of very meticulous research. Among others, 400 thousand pages of documents from the American archives regarding German crimes committed in Greece have been inspected. During the occupation the Germans killed tens killed tens of thousands of Greeks and 300,000 people died as a result of hunger resulting from the German occupation policy.

The Germans insist that they do not have to pay any compensation to Greece. In their opinion, the case was terminated when in 1960 they paid 115 million marks to the Greek government, that is, the sum which is equivalent to about 200 million dollars today.

(based on the article from the Rzeczpospolita daily)
rp.pl/Ekonomia/310299963-Grecja-chce-od-Niemiec-299-mld-euro-za-okupacje-w-czasie-II-wojny-swiatowej.html

Greece has no claim for reparations either. However they might be able to claim compensation for the forcible bank loan.

Delph and Tacitus do raise some significant points here.

Surely by the time the War ended in '45, everything on the continent of Europe was in total upheaval, dazed by bombings, shell shocked beyond measure, often impovrished and in ruins. As borders throughout most of Europe had been almost constantly changing hands practically since the Middle Ages, with Germany's defeat and the Allies almost vulture-like seeking to divvy up what they felt was their rightful share of the pie, there were naturally going to be claims of restitution, and I'm not merely talking about reparations to the Jews, a separate matter entirely!

In '47 and the drafting of the German Grundgesetz, later with the division of the country into East and West Germany, the key issue was land rights, determining legally whether or not those who were actually dispossessed of their rightful territory before the War were in fact "entitled" to its return.

In a manner of speaking, these issues still have not been resolved to the satisfaction of all concerned, and they doubtless won't be for some time.

There are still conflicts and open wars raging world wide because of the border drawings by Empires and govs which have long bitten the dust....some satisfaction will only be reached when enough smart people on all sides value the peace more.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_border_conflicts

This thread goes round and round but two logical points not mentioned

. Surely Russia should also owe reparations for the 1939 invasion ?

. Will future generations of Iraqis be able to claim reparations from Poland for its part in the illegal invasion ?

Some people seem to think so.

alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2017/1/19/iraq-demands-america-britain-pay-reparations-for-2003-invasion

I am sure mine will be a minority voice here, but I don't care.

Let them kill each other. Who gives a s***. What the US should be doing is selling arms to both sides and only the type that keeps them going for as long as possible while we are watching and fine tuning the bloody thing to prevent it from ending too soon.

A side benefit: while at each other throats, they are too busy to screw with us. Brilliant.

Na ja...googling that question I just read that Vietnam wants reparations for that US agent orange too...

atimes.com/vietnam-seeks-us-reparations-for-the-chemical-agent-orange

Tell them they can send it back for a full refund as long as they have the receipt.

Russia is not one to give out money simply bc people want it. Germany is as the 25 bil they spend on economic migrants shows. Therefore efforts should be focused on Germany

You can sue us. I can give you the address and the phone number: 1-800-****-off.

Because the filthy thieves that run the place are too busy stealing it!

...meaning the new german chancellor should Poland just show his middle finger too?

That would be the smart move for germany, but german leadership hasnt been known for making smart decisions lately. Theyd rather destroy their own culture and spend tens of billions providing for non european economic migrants for decades than right a real wrong. Merkel said that its germanys duty to take in migrants because of germanys history referring to ww2, but apparently paying the tab for countries they actually destroyed and millions they killed doesnt count, thats not germanys duty...

German Jews propose anti-Semitism lessons for Muslim migrants
bbc.com/news/world-europe-46095808
Yeah bc thatll really work put well, telling arabs not to be antisemitic lolol.

When Germans could learn to overcome their antisemitism, anybody can.

Somethink seems to be wrong with your head though, because why refugees should have anything to do with reparations makes probably only sense to you.

Yes!!! That damn war ended 73 years ago, for crying out loud! Time to tell them to STFU.
I see Dirk beat me to it, again.

First off theyre not refugees so quit talking nonsense. It is FACT that vast majority over 90% are economic migrants, not legit refugees from syria and Eritrea.

And it absolutely does. Germany spends 25 bil a year coddling economic migrants. Merkel says that its germanys duty to take them jn bc of their history, ww2. That 25 bil a year should go to poland instead, who unlike the migrants countries germany did not occupy and commit genocides in. If you cant see that clearly theres something wrong with your head. The fact you still call them refugees and not economic migrants is further evidence of that. You repeat the leftist pro migrant line like another NPC. Do you ever disagree with merkel, the eu or any leftists? Clearly not as you always defend their agenda even when the facts point out its wrong. Yeah help the migrants even though germany owes them nothing while with poland, who germany destroyed, Merkel does not want to fulfill a 'duty because of germanys history.'

Also, its a fact most of them entered without documents

sputniknews.com/amp/europe/201811041069500377-refugees-germany-documents-id/

The Interior Ministry said, as quoted by the Welt am Sonntag, that it was "aware that half of those who had entered the country intentionally hid their documents, thus trying to increase the chances of obtaining asylum."

The highest percentage of those who did not have any documents when entering Germany was among the refugees from Nigeria, Somali, Gambia, and Guinea-Bissau, amounting to 97-98 percent, according to the newspaper.