Jump to content

1935 Saar status referendum

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1935 Saar status referendum
13 January 1935(1935-01-13)
Results
Choice
 Votes %
Reunification with Germany 477,089 90.73%
Status quo 46,613 8.86%
Unification with France 2,124 0.40%
Valid votes 525,826 99.59%
Invalid or blank votes 2,161 0.41%
Total votes 527,987 100.00%
Registered voters/turnout 539,542 97.86%

A referendum on territorial status was held in theTerritory of the Saar Basinon 13 January 1935. Over 90% of voters opted for reunification withGermany,with 9% voting for the status quo as aLeague of Nations mandateterritory and less than 0.5% opting for unification withFrance.[1]

Background[edit]

At the end of World War I, the Saar was separated from Germany and administered by theLeague of Nations.[2]France was given control of the Saar'scoal mines.[3]After fifteen years of League of Nations administration, a referendum was scheduled to take place in the territory.[2][1]

Peacekeeping operation[edit]

Dutch Marines preparing to leave Rotterdam for the Saar
The obverse of the Saarland Plebiscite Peacekeeping Medal 1935 showing soldiers of England, Italy, Sweden, and The Netherlands
The lettering of the reverse of the Saarland Plebiscite Military Medal 1935: "13. JAN. VOLKSABSTIMMUNG SAARGEBIET 1935"

Towards the end of 1934, the League of Nations Council determined that a peacekeeping force would be necessary for the plebiscite period. The German and French governments agreed to allow an international force to enter the Saar. On 8 December 1934, the council unanimously approved a resolution calling for such a force. Britain (1,500 troops), Italy (1,300), Sweden (260) and the Netherlands (250) agreed to provide troops for the 3,300-strong International Force in the Saar.[4][5]All expenses above and beyond those normally incurred for the same troops were charged to the League fund set aside for the plebiscite.[6][7]The League appointed a commander, GeneralJohn Brind,with operational control of the force. Troops patrolled, but did not police, the Saar. They were not to respond except to emergencies and at the request of local authorities. There was little to no violence during the plebiscite and the peacekeeping effort was regarded as a success.[7]

Campaign[edit]

While most political groups in the Saar initially supported its return to Germany, opponents of Nazism in the Saar began having doubts and misgivings afterAdolf Hitlercame to power.[8]Due to Hitler's oppression of their German counterparts,communistsandsocialistssupported a continuation of the League of Nations administration, and a delay in the plebiscite until after the Nazis were no longer in power in Germany.[8]Roman Catholics were divided in regards to returning to German rule.[8]

In order to achieve victory in the referendum, the Nazis resorted to "a mixture of cajolery and brutal pressure".[9]In 1933,Sarah Wambaugh,one of the members of the Plebiscite Commission, stated that complaints of a Nazi "reign of terror" had been made by non-Nazi Saarlanders and by the foreign press.[10]The complaints included allegations that the Nazis engaged in intimidation, "espionage, secret denunciations, kidnappings...,... interception of letters and telegrams, [and] listening-in to telephone conversations", among other things.[10]In response, the Saar Governing Commission had to "promulgate several restrictive decrees for the maintenance of public order".[11]

In November 1934, fearing an armed intervention by France, which the German armed forces of the time would have been in no position to resist, the German government changed its tactics and reduced its belligerency.[12]Josef Bürckel,Hitler's commissioner for the Saar, banned the wearing of uniforms within a 40-kilometre (25 mi) zone along the Saar frontier between 10 January 1935 and 10 February 1935.[12]Burckel also banned meetings, parades, and processions in this area.[12]Jakob Pirro,the Nazi leader in the Saar, told his followers to obey the strictest discipline and implemented harsh penalties for any infractions.[12]

The German government was determined to score a landslide victory in the referendum for propaganda purposes, and created the Deutsche Front for this purpose in July 1933, which became a formidable force in the Saar thanks to generous financial support from Germany and its brutal methods, such as threats and voter intimidation. The CatholicCentre Partyof the Saar was merged into the new pro-German front, "yielding to threats of what would happen after the day of reckoning in 1935." According toGuenter Lewy,the people of the Saar increasingly preferred to stay in France because of the suppression and harassment of the Catholic Church in Germany by Nazi authorities.[13]

Territory of the Saar Basin

Voters were outraged by the killings of two prominent Catholic leaders,Erich KlausenerandAdalbert Probst,in theNight of the Long Knives.Arequiem massfor them drew large crowds, and a Catholic newspaperNeue Saar Postopposing Saar's return to Germany gained many new followers.Sarah Wambaughobserved "that the odds were now even, that the Church held the balance, and that unless Hitler should succeed in rehabilitating himself and should placate the Church, or unless the Nazi regime should be overthrown before January [the plebiscite had been scheduled for January 13, 1935], the Territory might be indefinitely lost to the Reich."[13]The campaign on both sides focused on appealing to thePolitical Catholicismof the voters. On 30th of November, 1934, over seventy members of the Catholic clergy founded an organisation namedDeutscher Volksbund für Christlichsoziale Gemeinschaft,which held meetings every Sunday under mottoes "for return to Germany, but not to Hitler Germany" and "Christ is our leader, not Hitler."[13]TheVolksbundproclaimed that a "great majority" of Saar clergy supported the status quo and urged voters to block the return of the Saar on the grounds that the best way to serve Germany is to block the "un-German National Socialist dictatorship".[13]The Nazis made an effort to combat concerns about theiranti-clericalismby appealing to the voters'anti-communism;pro-German newspapers printed pictures of atrocities from the Soviet Union, contrasting them to the "peace and prosperity" of the German Reich. However, ultimately the National Socialists mainly focused on intimidation, with Nazi paramilitaries "threatening retribution to all those who might dare to vote against return to the fatherland".[13]

Results[edit]

In the referendum, voters were asked whether the Saar should remain under League of Nations administration, return to Germany or become part of France.[2]To the surprise of neutral observers as well as the Nazis themselves, over 90% voted in favour of reuniting with Germany.[14]Every voting district saw at least 83% of voters support returning the Saar to German rule,[14]and despiteGeorges Clemenceau's claim that there were 150,000 Frenchmen in the Saar, fewer than 0.5% of voters supported the annexation of the Saar by France.[14][15]

The legitimacy of the referendum was questioned by foreign observers on grounds of widespread voter intimidation by the Berlin-sponsored Deutsche Front.[16]The Sunday Mailof Adelaide, South Australia, reported that the opponents of the Saar's return to Germany were "hounded off the streets and even blockaded in homes".[16]Jewish shops were boycotted and vandalised, and Nazi supporters visited Jewish homes and demanded their voting identity cards in exchange for protection. In his report,Marinus van der Goes van Natersstated that the Deutsche Front infiltrated public services such as municipal authorities and the police, and voters were forced to vote for Saar's return to Germany under threats of dismissals or loss of pension.[17]The Bulletin of International Newswrote that the Nazi militias "went from house to house asking people to sign an undertaking to do all they could to secure the return of the Saar to Germany", while pro-Nazi police officials kept "black lists" of people opposed to German rule of the Saar to be prevented from voting.[18]In addition, socialist and separatist newspapers such as theVolkstimmeandVolkszeitungwere taken down, and there were reports of illegal seizures and confiscations of documents by the members of theDeutsche Front.[18]Lewy Gunter believes that the result of the referendum could have been different with proper supervision, given the Catholic hostility towards the Nazi regime.[13]

ChoiceVotes%
Reunification with Germany477,08990.73
Status quo46,6138.86
Unification with France2,1240.40
Total525,826100.00
Valid votes525,82699.59
Invalid/blank votes2,1610.41
Total votes527,987100.00
Registered voters/turnout539,54297.86
Source:Direct Democracy

Aftermath[edit]

"The death of the Jews will end the Saarland's distress" —graffiti in a Jewish cemetery, November 1938

Following the referendum, theCouncil of the League of Nationsdecided that the Saar should return to Germany.[14]The Saar once again became part of Germany on 1 March 1935,[14]withJosef BürckelasReichskommissar.In 1936, it was incorporated into theGauof Rheinpfalz (Rhine Palatinate) to form the Gau Pfalz-Saar (renamed Gau Saarpfalz in January 1936 andGau Westmarkin December 1940).[19]Josef Bürckelremained theGauleiterand, from 11 March 1941,Reichsstatthalteruntil his death in September 1944. He was succeeded byWilli Stöhrwho served until the end of the war in May 1945.[20]

After the plebiscite, the Nazi authorities proceeded to clamp down on the Catholic Church's influence in public life, repressing and forcefully disbanding Catholic organisations. Guenter Lewy reports that the prosecution of the Catholic Church in the Saar was even worse than in the rest of Germany, as theReichskonkordatdid not apply to the territory. Even the part of Catholic clergy that campaigned for return of the Saar to Germany, such as Johann Ludger Schlich, was now forced to flee.[13]

The report of General Brind on the Saar force recommended that in the future all such peacekeeping forces be assembled from countries with no direct interest in the matter at hand. He noted that only a small force was necessary, since it was the moral authority of its presence that mattered. Both observations are central to modernpeacekeepingas opposed tocollective security.[7]

TheNansen International Office for Refugeeswas responsible for the successful settlement of the Saar refugees inParaguayafter 1935.[21]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^abPollock, James K. (1935)."The Saar Plebiscite".American Political Science Review.29(2): 275–282.doi:10.2307/1947508.ISSN0003-0554.JSTOR1947508.S2CID143303667.
  2. ^abcM G Callagher."The Saar Plebiscite, 1935".Moodle.kkc.school.nz. Archived fromthe originalon 12 February 2018.Retrieved2 May2014.
  3. ^"The Saar plebiscite".History Today.13 January 1935.Retrieved2 May2014.
  4. ^Norrie MacQueen (ed.),The United Nations, Peace Operations and the Cold War,2nd ed. (Routledge, 2011), doc. 1.
  5. ^Alfred F. Kugel,Allied Plebiscite Activity in the Saar Territory, 1935Military Postal History Society.
  6. ^Mohammed Bedjaoui,The New World Order and the Security Council: Testing the Legality of Its Acts(Martinus Nijhoff, 1994), p. 240.
  7. ^abcPaul F. Diehl,Peace Operations(Polity Press, 2008), pp. 34–36.
  8. ^abcRussell, Frank (1951).The Saar Battleground And Pawn(1 ed.). Palo Alto, California: Stanford University Press. p. 88.
  9. ^Russell, Frank (1951).The Saar Battleground And Pawn(1 ed.). Palo Alto, California: Stanford University Press. p. 91.
  10. ^abRussell, Frank (1951).The Saar Battleground And Pawn(1 ed.). Palo Alto, California: Stanford University Press. p. 89.
  11. ^Russell, Frank (1951).The Saar Battleground And Pawn(1 ed.). Palo Alto, California: Stanford University Press. p. 90.
  12. ^abcdRussell, Frank (1951).The Saar Battleground And Pawn(1 ed.). Palo Alto, California: Stanford University Press. p. 96.
  13. ^abcdefgLewy, Guetner(1964)."The German Roman Catholic Hierarchy and the Saar Plebiscite of 1935".Political Science Quarterly.79(2): 184–208.doi:10.2307/2146062.JSTOR2146062.
  14. ^abcdeRussell, Frank (1951).The Saar Battleground And Pawn(1st ed.). Palo Alto, California: Stanford University Press. p. 104.
  15. ^Greenwood, H. Powys (25 January 1935)."Lessons of the Saar".The Spectator.Retrieved2 May2014.
  16. ^ab"Tension grows hourly over vital Saar Plebiscite".Adelaide. 12 January 1935.Archivedfrom the original on 13 January 2023.Retrieved13 January2023.
  17. ^van der Goes van Naters, Marinus(20 August 1953).The Future Position of the Saar: Some Historical, Legal and Economic Aspects of the Saar Problem(1 ed.). Strasbourg: Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. p. 40.
  18. ^abL., H. (1934)."The Campaign for the Plebiscite in the Saar".Bulletin of International News.11(5): 3–11.JSTOR25639323.
  19. ^"Reich Celebrates Year of Saar Rule,"The New York Times(New York) 13 January 1936, p.8.
  20. ^Michael D. Miller & Andreas Schulz:Gauleiter: The Regional Leaders of the Nazi Party and Their Deputies, 1925-1945, Volume I (Herbert Albrecht - H. Wilhelm Hüttmann).R. James Bender Publishing, 2012, p. 94,ISBN1-932970-21-5.
  21. ^Nansen International Office for Refugees - HistoryNobel Prize
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1935_Saar_status_referendum&oldid=1232405712"