Features
Most of Romania’s Jews were massacred during World War II, but not Bucharest’s Jews; Here’s why…
By ROBERTA SERET, PH.D. Anti-Semitism had always been part of Romanian culture long before the war, but it was in 1927 with the establishment of the Iron Guard, Romania’s fascist party, that their practices publicly centered on eliminating all Jews in Romania by torture and death squads.
In honor of Holocaust Remembrance Day, reflecting on the treatment of the Bucharest Jews during this time, I realize that this part of history may not be well known. I feel it is important to revisit the facts. In my forthcoming novel, “Gift of Diamonds”, a survival story beginning in 1960s Romania, where Communism was rampart, I intersperse the evils of Communism with Fascism. Both heinous forms of government used similar horrors of destroying people with torture and death squads. In Romania, it began with Fascism.
King Carol ll, the royal-dictator (1930-1940) included in his government fascist practices, beginning by signing a law that was influenced by the Nuremberg racist protocols that defined who was to be considered Jewish. He tightened his dictatorship against Jews until 1940 when he was forced to abdicate and left for Portugal with his Jewish mistress, Magda Lupescu. General Ion Antonescu eagerly took power in September 1940, formed an alliance with the Iron Guard and tightened restrictions on the Jews.
The Iaşi death trains are estimated to have killed between eight and fourteen thousand Jews in the summer of 1941. Over 100 people were stuffed into each car, and many died of thirst, starvation, and suffocation aboard two trains that for eight days travelled back and forth across the countryside, stopping only to discard the dead (as photographed).
One year later, he destroyed the organization after a heinous act in January 1941: the Iron Guard had lists of rich Jews and hunted them in their homes. They tortured them until they signed over their houses and properties. Then they shot them in the forest. Others were taken to Bucharest’s slaughterhouse, where they were hung on butcher’s hooks, still alive to be tortured more. Their bellies were cut open and their entrails hung around their necks. Their dead bodies were hanged on hooks with a sign under each body, “Kosher meat.”
And still, the Iron Guard legacy of anti-Semitism and torture continued to influence Antonescu’s dictatorial regime during the war.
Anti-Semitism ravaged the Jewish population throughout the country, especially in areas outside the capital as in Bukovina, a territory previously owned by the Austrian-Hungarian Empire, and in Bessarabia, acquired from Russia, as well as in Moldavia and sections of Transylvania. All Romanian Jews received rights of citizenship in 1923, but in 1940, that citizenship was taken away from all Jews except those living in Bucharest. The Jews residing outside the capital were persecuted, rounded up and forced into death trains. Genocide was the goal. Those who survived were sent to Transnistria, a camp where typhus and starvation slaughtered more than 200,000, including 50,000 children.
Strangely, the Bucharest Jews were spared. Their population of 100,000 were not forced to wear yellow Jewish stars, or to live in ghettos, or to be deported. The question is who protected them? Paradoxically, it was General Ion Antonescu, himself, with assistance from Romania’s Chief Rabbi, Alexandru Safran, and the respected president of the Jewish communities, Wilhelm Filderman, with the Queen mother of Romania, Elena. Why did Antonescu, the fascist dictator, get involved to help?
Antonescu was aware that after losses on the Eastern Front in the battle of Stalingrad (August 1942 – February 1943), when he had allied his army to the Germans, that the Axis power could lose the war. At this time, Antonescu had in place the intention of stripping the Bucharest Jews of their citizenship and deporting them to camps. But Queen Elena and her son, King Mihai, intervened and organized formidable resistance against the dictator. Rabbi Safran and Filderman joined forces with the Royal family.
Antonescu was a rabid, violent anti-Semite. Even Adolph Eichmann had warned Antonescu that he was being “too cruel and sloppy with his Jews.” And yet, he didn’t want to appear to the outside world as being a monster. Consequently, he met regularly with Queen Elena and Rabbi Safran to discuss which Jews on their list should be spared. The Queen had warned the fascist leader that she was determined, “If the Romanian Jews were sent to Auschwitz, she would march next to them.” It was at this time that Antonescu realized the tide of war was turning against Germany, and that the Bucharest Jews could represent for him an insurance policy in case of a post-war trial for “crimes against humanity.” The Bucharest Jews, alive, could serve as collateral for his own survival.
In addition to a judicial justification, Antonescu began negotiating a financial deal without either Hitler or Eichmann ever knowing – to sell the Bucharest Jews and send them to Palestine. But the British, who controlled Palestine at that time, didn’t want to upset the Arabs. Even though Ben-Gurion, the leader of Israel, wanted the Bucharest Jews to build up the new country, the British told Antonescu, no. They called it a slave trade, unethical to sell people.
Antonescu persisted in trying. He had another idea, a business concept to trade and sell human lives: Jews for exit visas. His plan was to extort cash from American and world Jewish organizations for the sale of Romanian Jews. Such a scheme could simultaneously placate his government officials by their receiving from exiting Jews, a windfall of abandoned homes, gold, paintings, jobs, and businesses.
A key figure in this market was Henry Morgenthau, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, under President Roosevelt. Since 1934, he was the only Jew in Roosevelt’s cabinet and was active in bringing to the president various rescue plans to stop the annihilation of European Jews. Despite criticism about a slave trade extortion plan, the committee for a Jewish Army of Stateless and Palestinian Jews, a Zionist organization in New York, with the help of Morgenthau, placed an ad in The New York Times on February 16, 1943 saying, “For sale to Humanity, 70,000 Jews, Guaranteed Human Beings at $50 a piece.” There was no interest. No potential buyer came forward. And President Roosevelt hesitated to push the plan forward. It was an election year and not a popular idea. The rescue plan fell through, and with it the lives of 70,000 souls and thousands of children.
Morgenthau, tirelessly negotiated with Antonescu, while stalling for an end to the war. As negotiations continued, on August 23,1944 King Mihai, residing in the Royal Palace in Bucharest, organized a coup d’état against General Antonescu, who had been imprisoned by the king. In the process, the king and his new government declared war on the Axis powers and asked the Romanian Army not to resist the Red Army. One week later, on August 31, 1944, the Soviets entered the capital. An armistice was signed with Moscow on September 12,1944, and the Soviet occupation remained in Romania. Two years later, on June 1,1946 in Bucharest, Antonescu was executed by a military firing squad for war crimes. He had been responsible for the death of 300,000-380,000 Romanian Jews during the war.
The irony of history is that the Russians saved the Bucharest Jews. In honor of Holocaust Remembrance Day, I remember the horrific numbers:
In 1930, Romania had a Jewish population of 725,000-750,000.
In 1945, 290,000-360,000 Jews had survived.
In 1940 there were 95,072 Jews living in Bucharest.
In 1945 there were 100,000-150,000 Jews living in Bucharest, which included Jews from other sections of the country who had sought safety in the capital.
ROBERTA SERET, Ph.D. is the founder and executive director of the Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) at United Nations, International Cinema Education Organization and the Director of ESL and Film for the Hospitality Committee of the United Nations. She is an adjunct instructor at New York University in Film. Her work in the United Nations Global Classroom has been praised by various influential Americans, including Michelle Obama, Mike Bloomberg, and Caroline Kennedy. The Transylvanian Trilogy is her first fiction series, with Gift of Diamonds now available and Love Odyssey releasing March 23, 2021.
Features
Understanding the Differences Between the Three Roulette Classes
Roulette is one of those games that denotes the world of casinos most iconically with its spinning wheel and suspenseful moment when people wait for the ball to land on a number. Not all roulette, however, is the same. There are three classes of roulette: European, American, and French. They have rules and variations that somehow make them stand out and give extremely different gaming experiences. Let’s take a look at some of these differences and understand what makes each roulette class special.
The Classic Choice of the European Roulette
The typical character of European Roulette is the presence of a single zero, thus making it highly favorable among players due to a very low house advantage of 2.7% and, therefore, higher odds of winning. It offers a number of inside and outside bets that can suit different players’ appetites for risk. The reason the players like European Roulette is that it is easy to play, and the odds are quite even.
This game of roulette easily finds its place on most online websites in several variants, from differently themed games to different betting limits to accommodate any type of player. Be it a new starter or a seasoned gamer, European Roulette offers them all a slick and smooth experience with good graphics and interaction that they would want more of.
The Elegance and the Strategy of the French Roulette
French Roulette is often touted as the most sophisticated style of the game. It shares this with European Roulette, which also has a single zero wheel; however, the features are different, with the inclusion of various rules termed “La Partage” and “En Prison.” These rules create such a drastic reduction in the house edge down to as low as 1.35% on even-money bets that it affords the player a number of options for a gaming experience. French Roulette also boasts an assortment of table layouts and special bets that give the game a strategic edge, intriguing experienced players.
Spin Casino roulette games offer a sophisticated, classic European casino atmosphere in the version of French Roulette. The detailed tutorials and user-friendly interface mean that new players will take no time to learn the nuances of this great game, allowing everyone to enjoy the strategic depth of this variation.
The American Roulette, With High Stakes
Another successful variant is American Roulette, most especially in North American casinos. The key difference between American and European roulette lies in the addition of a double zero slot on the wheel. This adds to a 5.26% house edge, thereby giving it a moderate advantage over its European cousin. This also contains an extra layer of unpredictability and fun with the double zero and lures players who like higher stakes and a faster-moving pace of the game.
The realness of the experience means that American Roulette fans will get a true taste of Las Vegas-style casino action. From this brand, high-quality American Roulette games are available for players to try their luck with the double zero in immersive graphics and sound effects that bring the excitement of the casino right to your screen.
Try these roulette variations and enter a whole new world of casino gaming, where each spin holds a new chance at excitement and rewards. Be it for the first-timer or a seasoned player, roulette is a game in which the thrill keeps one sitting on the edge.
Features
Auschwitz Tours from Warsaw: Preserving Memory, Honoring History
Auschwitz is one of the most powerful symbols of the Holocaust and its lessons are as current as ever. As the world prepares for International Holocaust Day the need to remember and educate becomes even more urgent.
At Auschwitz Tours from Warsaw, our mission is to help you connect with this dark chapter in history. We offer guided tours to Auschwitz-Birkenau from Warsaw and Krakow so you can visit the largest Nazi concentration and extermination camp where over a million innocent lives were taken.
Why Auschwitz Tours from Warsaw?
A visit to Auschwitz is an emotional experience and we want you to get the most out of it. Our guides will walk you through the historical context, tell you stories of those who suffered, resisted, and in some cases survived. With respect and sensitivity, we will share the history that can’t be forgotten.
We offer full day tours from both Warsaw and Krakow so you can visit Auschwitz whether you’re coming from Poland’s capital or its cultural hub. Our tours include comfortable round trip transportation so you can focus on the experience without worrying about the logistics.
Extra Educational Content
Apart from the day trips, Auschwitz Tours from Warsaw also provides a lot of educational content about Auschwitz and the Holocaust. Our website is a resource for learning with articles and materials about Auschwitz’s history, World War II, and the long-term impact of the Holocaust.
For those who can’t visit in person, these materials are a window into this dark period of human history so the lessons of the Holocaust are available to everyone.
Honoring the Past on International Holocaust Remembrance Day
International Holocaust Remembrance Day on January 27th is a global moment of remembrance. It’s a day to remember the 6 million Jews and millions of others murdered by the Nazis during World War II.
It’s not just about the victims of the Nazi regime but about learning from history so we never repeat the mistakes.
January 27th is the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau in 1945, a day of unimaginable suffering but also of survival. The site itself is closed on this day for commemoration, but it’s a place of great importance for those who want to reflect on what happened here.
Although the gates are closed to visitors on January 26 and 27, it’s a day of personal reflection and remembrance for those who have passed away.
But on January 27th, a special area will be open for those who want to mark this solemn day on the grounds of the Memorial. This is a unique opportunity to reflect and remember in silence, on the very ground where so many lives were lost.
If you can’t visit Auschwitz today, International Holocaust Remembrance Day is still a chance to connect with the stories of survivors and victims. It’s a day to educate ourselves and others, not just about the past but about the present need to face hatred, intolerance, and anti-Semitism in all its forms.
If you’d like to learn more about our tours or explore our educational content, visit us at auschwitztoursfromwarsaw.com. Join us in remembering the past and keeping the message of “Never Again” alive.
Features
The Hurdles Facing Egyptian Intellectuals
By HENRY SREBRNIK In the twentieth century, many middle-class Egyptians adopted a cosmopolitan cultural style. They wanted to move the country toward a more liberal and secular state.
But they always came up against, and were unable to surmount, the strength of a very strong Islamic religious culture. In despair, some, despite their own preferences, ended up preferring autocracy to what they considered a backward and dangerous ideology.
In 1952, a revolution brought the Free Officers movement, led by Gamal Abdel Nasser, to power. It seemed to have brought a secular quasi-socialist regime to power.
But the undercurrents of politicized religion, though banned by Nasser, did not disappear. The Muslim Brotherhood, which had been founded in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna and preached a fundamentalist Islamism guarded exclusively by the sharia, was outlawed. Its most prominent theoretician, Sayyid Ibrahim Qutb, was executed in 1966.
But secular movements fell from favour following Egypt’s defeat by Israel in 1967, and the country was transformed into an autocracy following Nasser’s death three years later. From 1981 until 2011, Egypt was ruled with an iron hand by Hosni Mubarak, until popular unrest forced him to step down during the Arab Spring.
Would this herald a new, democratic chapter in Egypt? Would free elections bring about a rebirth of secular politics? The answer was no.
Mubarak’s ouster cleared the way for the Muslim Brotherhood to participate openly in Egyptian politics, and to that end the group formed the Freedom and Justice Party. In April 2012 the party selected Mohamed Morsi to be its candidate in Egypt’s presidential election. Morsi defeated Ahmed Shafiq, a former prime minister under Mubarak, that June.
Morsi soon issued an edict declaring that his authority as president would not be subject to judicial oversight until a permanent constitution came into effect. Although he defended the edict as a necessary measure to protect Egypt’s transition to democracy, mass demonstrations were held against what many saw as a seizure of dictatorial powers.
Worsening economic conditions, deteriorating public services, and a string of sectarian incidents, including attacks on the country’s Coptic Christian minority, strengthened opposition to Morsi’s rule. Clashes between Morsi’s supporters and critics in late June 2013 culminated in massive anti-Morsi protests around the country.
On July 3 the military under the head of the Egyptian Armed Forces, General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, removed Morsi from power. A figurehead president, Adly Mansour, was installed, but it was clear that Sisi, who retained the title of defence minister, wielded power.
Sisi claimed that the military had carried out the will of the Egyptian people, as expressed in the anti-Morsi protests, and that the Islamist-dominated administration led by Morsi had put the Muslim Brotherhood’s interests before those of the country.
A month later the Egyptian police and armed forces committed what Human Rights Watch deemed “one of the world’s largest killings of demonstrators in a single day in recent history.”
Eleven years on, the murder of over 1,000 supporters of the deposed president, known as the Rabaa Massacre, has gone largely unpunished. The Muslim Brotherhood was formally outlawed that September and Morsi was jailed. Prison conditions were harsh, and he was denied adequate medical attention. He died in 2019.
Sisi officially left the military to run for president and was elected in a clearly fraudulent manner in May 2014. He has been re-elected twice since, in March 2018 and again in December 2023, when he was reported to have won with 89.6 per cent of the vote after several opposition figures were prevented from participating. Under his reign, Egypt has degenerated into a police state even more repressive than the 30-year dictatorship of Hosni Mubarak.
Caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place, Egypt’s pro-democracy and civil society movements jettisoned their long-standing commitments to human rights and the rule of law and enthusiastically supported the return of military rule.
One of those civil society leaders, Saad Eddin Ibrahim, was among Egypt’s most influential intellectual figures. He had spent his career insisting that democracy is the solution both to political authoritarianism and to the allures of religious fundamentalism in the Arab world.
Pushing back against the prevailing view that Islamist groups must be marginalized, he argued that they should be included in the democratic process. He even went so far as to advocate, in an article titled “Toward Muslim Democracies,” that “it will be better for us as democrats, for the Islamists, and for Egypt to enlist Islamists under the flag of democracy.”
He encouraged Egyptians to support this vision and put aside common fears about Islamist movements and had been arrested for his views under Mubarak. Yet even he abruptly became an apologist for authoritarian rule.
The “problem” was that the bulk of the Egyptian masses were unwilling to part with their religious traditions or wholly consign them to the realm of the private. Put another way, if most Egyptians were given the choice between being liberal or being Muslim, they would overwhelmingly select the latter.
Faced with that reality, these intellectuals forged authoritarian alliances to forcibly impose their worldview on an otherwise unwilling populace. When Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood were in actual control of the state rather than at its fringes, the liberal secularists chose authoritarian rule. This is the same tragedy found in most of the Arab world.
Henry Srebrnik is a professor of political science at the University of Prince Edward Island.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login