24,626 research outputs found

    The prosecution of multi-theatre warfare : an analysis of the German military leadership's attempt to direct war in simultaneous theatres : a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History at Massey University

    Get PDF
    On 1 September 1939 Adolf Hitler convened a session of the Reichstag to announce war with Poland. Dressed in a grey field tunic, he declared that Polish aggression would be suppressed, and that he would wear the tunic until "victory is ours, or, I shall not live to see the day!"1 Germany did not win the war, and Hitler did not live to see the day of its defeat. The established record of the Second World War adequately portrays what happened, and the chronology is ingrained. Nevertheless, aspects of the war have been neglected, especially in relation to command issues within the German armed forces. Because of the prominence of Hitler in all accounts, the actions of those below him have traditionally been marginalised. The purpose of this thesis is to address this 'gap' in history by evaluating the overall German military leadership's attempt to direct war in simultaneous theatres. Using primary sources such as war diaries, memoirs, and various accounts of FĂŒhrer conferences, this study will analyse how the unique German command structure eventually contributed heavily to Germany's defeat. While many authors hold Hitler solely responsible for defeat, and thus overlook the role of others, my work is primarily concerned with analysing the German High Command structure and its attempt to direct war on multiple fronts at the same time. Responsibility for eventual German defeat cannot be laid at Hitler's feet alone because while he maintained sole executive powers, he remained open to the suggestions of those in his inner circle. In the end, those figures, who will be discussed in this study, failed Germany because they were unable to present a united front against Hitler when the situation became critical for the armed forces after 1941

    Soft Law and the Protection of Vulnerable Migrants

    Get PDF
    Since the 1980s, an increasing number of people have crossed international borders outside of regularized migration channels, whether by land, air or sea. Policy debates on these kinds of movements have generally focused on security to the neglect of a focus on rights. In a range of situations, though, irregular migrants, who fall outside of the protection offered by international refugee law and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), may have protection needs and, in some cases, an entitlement to protection under international human rights law. Such protection needs may result from conditions in the country of origin or as a result of circumstances in the host or transit countries. However, this article argues that despite the existence of international human rights norms that should, in theory, protect such people, there remains a fundamental normative and institutional gap in the international system. Rather than requiring new hard law treaties to fill the gap, the article argues that a “soft law” framework should be developed to ensure the protection of vulnerable irregular migrants, based on two core elements: first, the consolidation and application of existing international human rights norm into sets of guiding principles for different groups of vulnerable irregular migrants; and second, improved mechanisms for inter-agency collaboration to ensure implementation of these norms and principles. This article suggests that learning from the precedent of developing the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement and its corresponding institutional framework can be particularly instructive in this regard
    • 

    corecore