Transnistrian refugees in Romania, in 1944

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Transnistrian refugees in Romania, in 1944

На початку 1944р. Румунії довелося евакуйовувати певну частину населення Трансністрії. Окрім армії та румунських державних службовців, які забезпечували функціонування окупаційного режиму, вона також мала подбати і про місцеве населення, що співпрацювало з румунською владою, для того, щоб вберегти його від радянської помсти. Доля цих переселенців прослідковується за архівними документами.

Ключові слова: Трансністрія, Румунія, Друга світова війна, Іон Антонеску, етнічна політика

At the beginning of 1944, Romania had to evacuate Transdniester. Besides the army and the Romanian public servants who had ensured the functioning of the occupation regime, they had to think of withdrawing the local population that had collaborated with the Romanian authorities in order to keep them away from the Soviet retaliation. The fate of these refugees is retraced based on the archive documents.

Key words: Transnistria, refugees, Romania, World War II, Ion An- tonescu, ethnic politics transnistrian refugee romania

As we know, in the summer of 1941, after having freed the territory occupied by the USSR a year before, the Romanian army continued their offensive across the Dniester. This generated protests of the Romanian public opinion but Marshal Ion Antonescu, the Leader of the State, argued that Romanian had to go on fighting along Germany against USSR in order to be sure that the Soviet danger would be completely pushed away from the country's borders.in 1941, the German-Romanian armies occupied wide territories in the west of the USSR, Romania being responsible for the administration of the region between the Dniester and the Bug (Transnistria) which was placed under the control of a civilian administration, distinct from the structures of the Romanian state (The Transnistria Government).

Dunarea de Jos University of Galati, Romania, geo.enache@gmail.com. There are many discussions regarding the future intentions for this region. Germany saw Transnistria as a compensation given to Romania for having lost the North-western Transylvania but this was categorically rejected by the Romanian government. Officially, Transnistria was considered an occupied territory which Romania only administered.

During the meeting of the Ministers Council, on January 26 1944, where they discussed the withdrawal of the Romanian troops and administration from Transnistria, Marshal Antonescu and the primeminister, Mihai Antonescu, presented a number of considerations regarding the principles on the basis of which the territory between the Dniester and the Bug was administered. One of the tasks given to the Transnistrian authorities by the the prime minister was that they should keep all documents regarding the Romanian administration between the Dniester and the Bug in perfect order so they can be brought to the peace conference after the war: “Transnistria will be a problem at the Peace Conference no matter the result of the war. Russia is a great power and, no matter the result of the war, at the Peace Conference it will bring about the issue of rights and interest related to the war regime. The Transnistrian archive must display all tasks and hardships faced by the Romanian state, the sums spent for investments, to start the factories and the institutions on this territory, the money spent of cultural activities bit also the sums spent for the preservation of this territory: the road building expenses as well as the public works” [8, p. 59].

On his turn, Ion Antonescu said: “as for the purely administrative part, I am held responsible in the face of history and in front of the tomorrow peace conference because, as I have said many times, in Transnistria there was one of the most civilized administrations that has ever been accomplished by any occupant in a modern war ... which gave the population of this province the opportunity to have better households and enjoy a greater freedom as compared to the life they used to have and the regime they used to endure under the Bolshevik domination” [8, p. 60]. The objective of the Romanian administration in Transnistria, economically speaking, was to restore the agriculture and industry in the region so as they could sustain the needs of the local population and those of the Romanian army which continued its offensive towards the East. Nobody intended an occupation regime abiding by the laws of war, through which the goods existing on the territory between the Dniester and the Bug could be purely and simply confiscated. Obviously, the economy of Transnistria was controlled by the Romanian authorities and it was connected to the Romanian economy but, based on the possibilities of that time, Transnistria was not treated as a simple colony but as an economic and administrative entity with its own budget and its capacity to make commercial trades so as Transnistria could access a “normal” economic circuit, meant to ensure the sustainable growth of the region [7, p. 122-124] Some authorities in Romania even accused Governor Gheorghe Alexianu of not supporting more actively the Romanian economic interests and the Germans were dissatisfied because they had to pay for what they considered to be war spoils. Both aspects are underlined in the discussions during the ministers' council, Ion Antonescu government..

This approach had also a propagandistic side. The “civilized” administration model that Romania suggested in Transnistria was to be perceived in opposition to the Soviet “barbarianism”. Freeing the inhabitants between the Dniester and the Bug was also accomplished through cultural actions, education and promoting religious values. From this perspective one can identify three significant pillars which constituted a reason to be proud for Ion Antonescu and for Gheorghe Alexianu, the governor of Transnistria. They are the Romanian Orthodox Church Mission in Transnistria, the university and the opera in Odessa.

The Orthodox Mission functioned along other smaller missions belonging to other denominations and their purpose was the rebirth of the religious feeling as an opposition for the atheist Bolshevik politics. This mission took in the very few local priests that had survived the retaliations but a significantly important number of priests had to be broght from Romania to make up for the lack of personnel.

Officially, the university in Odessa was in refuge but the Romanian authorities decided to open a “nonbolshevik” university with teaching staff that had chosen to remain in Odessa. The university was opened on December the 7th, 1941, iniatilly comprising three faculties and then seven. The leadership of the university was entrusted to the eminent surgeon Ceasovnikov, a convinced anticommunist. The first faculties were: medicine, polytechnic and agronomy; later on, specialities such as law, history, philosophy, philology and sciences were added. At the beginning of 1944, the university had around 2000 students [1, p. 159].

In the speech delivered at the opening ceremony, Gheorghe Alexi- anu highlighted the objectives of this endeavour: “People establish profound affinities with each other based on understanding, comradeship, friendship ... which are difficult to practice especially during the communism years when the oppressive dictatorship was pressing more and more heavily upon your shoulders ... We are at war, this is it, today you, as everybody alse, are suffering; your parents, your brothers and your relatives are fighting and dying on the front to protect your fatherland! We are doing the same trying to protect what has been forcefully taken away from us. I neither discuss, nor politicize this aspect. We are here to understand our sufferings and worries . the university doors open tody for the entire youth of Transnistria, even if one can still hear cannon shots in the distance ... You, the young ones, are called upon to create the foundation of this new life whose purpose is to comfort those who have gone through so many hardships” [1, p. 157].

Trying to rehabilitate Gheroghe Alexianu's memory, his son, Serban, recalled among his parent's major accomplishments the reopening of the Odessa opera: “Along with the opening of the Odessa University, they also inaugurated the Opera and the National Theater as well, both of theme with the same pleiade of actors. No sacrifice was too great for the Romanian administrative authority in order to keep the shows going at the Opera. In spite of the fact that the city was in ruins . the opera had once again become the symbol of the city and the theather was always full; one of the main factors that contributed to the well functioning of the opera was the artistic personnel ...” [1, p. 161]. On his turn, during the Ministers Council meeting on June 21st, 1944, where the situation of the Transnistrian refugees was discussed, Marshal Ion Antonescu underlined the fact that the Odessa opera ensemble as “perfect”, insisting on the fact that the artists from Odessa that were refugees should be given a purpose worthy of their abilities [8, p. 348].

The Ion Antonescu regime was a nationalist one and this is the reason why the Romanian (Moldavian) minority in Transdniester enjoyed special attention. Moreover, under the coordination of Professor Anton Golopentia, the Institute of Statistics ran ample research to identify the Romanian villages east of the Bug which were going as far as the Caucasus. The plan was to firstly bring them to Transnistria and expose them to a decommunizing program that would restore their national identity so as, later on, to be broght back to Bessarabia, primarily in the southern part, in the settlements that had been abandoened by the German colonists in 1940.

The protection of Romanian national interests pushed marshal An- tonescu toward a xenophobic attitude. The Jews and the Gypsies were subjected to an extermination regime while the Slavs (the Russinas and the Ukrainians) were seen as a threat against the Romanian national space. Hardly had the Soviet authorities occupied Bessarabia in 1940 that they started colonizing the villages abandoned by Germans with population from Galitia. The marshal ordered them to return to their place of origin, planning to replace them with Romaninas from across the Bug. This xenophobic attitude was nevertheless often nuanced in special cases such as those people of other origin than Romanina who manifested loyalty toward the Romanian authorities. On the other hand, Gheorghe Alexianu manifested greater openness towards the Slavic majority of the Transnistrian population, the rights granted to the Romanian population aiming only at restating the national identity destroyed by the imperial Russian and Soviet policies and not at stating the “superiority” of the Latin race over the Slavic one.

All these elements made it possible that in Transnistria one could recruit from the local population those people that were willing to cooperate with the occupation regime: intellectuals, public servants, engineers from the reopened factories, agronomists.

After the Stalingrad victory, in July 1943, the Red Army led a continuous offensive against the German-Romanian armies in Ukraine. The Axes troops had to evacuate the Cuban area, Donetk region, reorganizing along the Dniepre line which was nonetheless broken by the Soviet offensive. The continuous battles, that lasted seven months, exhausted the Axes troops.

On March the 3rd, 1944, the Soviet troops restart the offensive and break the Uman front. The Axes troops are overwhelmed and the Soviets have a clear path crossing the Bug, then the Dniester and the Prut in the northern part, as a result conquering parts of the Romanian territory. With great efforts, the Axes troops manage to stabilize the front in the Lvyv-Ternopil region while, in Romania, the front is stabilized along the strategic line Targu Frumos - Iasi - Chisinau. The Soviet offensive goes on in the south of Ukraine as well, the Soviet troops entering Odessa on April the 10th, 1944, but the Red Army stopped along the line og the inferior Dniester. This frontline was kept till August the 20th 1944 when the great Iasi-Chisinau offensive starts and Romania's exiting the war on August the 23rd 1944 led to the collapse of the entire south-east front and to the wide opening of the way for the Red Army towards the Balkans and Hungary [6, p. 217-239].

From January to April 1944 the Romanian authorities were preoccupied to organise the military resistence, focusing on organising the Iasi-Chisinau defence line. Moreover, plans were designed regarding the evacuation of the regions in the conflict zone and these plans referred not only to Moldova, Bucovina and Bessarabia but also the Transnistrian region which had been under Romanian administration since 1944.

As the Soviet troops were getting closer to the Bug, on January 29th, 1944, Marshal Ion Antonescu decided to cease the civilian administration in Transnistria and replace it with a military administration under the command of General Gheorghe Potopeanu; later on, the territory between the Bug and the Dniester got under German military occupation .

The Ministers Council meeting on January the 26th, 1944, discussed the evacuation of Transnistria. Obviously, the discussin referred to the army, constabulary and other Romanian institutions. In addition, the government structures under the coordination of Gheorghe Alexianu became the General Secretary of Asset Administration which took over the Romanian assests in Transnistria in order to administer them in the country. However, the plan also included the civilian population.

The action of organising the refuge of the administration and population from Transnistria, Bessarabia, Bucovina and Moldova was given the code name 1111 and it was coordinated by the Army General Staff. On February the 8th, 1944, the General Staff representatives of the above-mentioned provinces were instructed about the evacuation procedures. These instructions referred to industrial installations, food resources, animals, public institutions, treasury goods, hospitals but also to population. The fundamental idea at the basis of the entire

At the middle of March [4, f. 76].

The correspondance kept by the General Staff used the following codes: Operation 1111 - the works about the evacuation of goods from Transdniester, regarding the army; operation 111 A - the works about the evacuation of goods from Transdniester, regarding the Transdniester government; operation 1111 BM - the evacuation of goods from Bessarabia, Bucovina and Moldova, reagrding the army and the civilian authorities. [4, f. 99].

process was that the population movements should be minimum for multiple reasons: there was no intention to deprive some territories of the Romanian population, it was estimated that a massive evacuation would lead to great problems and there was hope that the retreat was just temporary and that, eventually, these territories would get back under the control of the Romanian authorities; this is why they were not to be plundered. Clear instructions were given that, as far as the food (cereals, sugar, and oil) or animals for feeding and traction, only the surplus should be evacuated in order for it to be used to supply the army. “In principle”, the order said, “the men must not be left without the cattle that they need for milk or work.” The cereals, the sugar or the oil were to be evacuated making sure that the population is left with living necessities till the next crop.

As for the industry, they were to disassemble and relocate only those industries that were considered necessary for the war effort, indicated by the Ministery of Army Supply and National Economy, as well as those private factories whose owners were willing to pay for relocation. No factory was destroyed in the evacuated zone, Transd- niester included.

As far as the population to be evacuated was concerned, the document clearly mentioned that the interest of the Romanian authorities was not that a large number of people should leave their homes but that the number of evacuees should be minimum. Mention was made that “the priests, the teachers and the public servants with local interests, who are not part of any military element, should remain and act as guides of Romanian life in the occupied territory.” The first to leave were the public servants that were assigned elsewhere, those who had to move to safety asstests of their institutions, the workers that accompanied the disassembled factories. Others, who did not belong to these categories, could join them only with a special approval. The population from an evacuated region was to go to a certain area in western Romania, clearly specified by the authorities, and only there. All the evacuees were to live in the placement area on their own [4, f. 150-157].

The instructions clearly specified that the Jews and other minorities were not to be evacuated [4, f. 150-157]. Ion Antonescu motivated his decision at the Ministries Council through his intention of not bringing non-Romanian population on Romanian territory given the fact that he was forced to leave numerous Romanians at the discretion of the Soviets. In spite of this, in the case of Transnistria, the marshal agreed that, besides the representatives of the Romanian administration in the area and a part of the Romanian (Moldavian) population in Transnistria, other citizens of different ethnic backgrounds should also be evacuated if they had supported the occupation regime and were facing the danger of being condemned and executed by the Soviet regime4.

Thus, in the case of the Transnistrian refugees, there are three categories: the government public servants, who were compactly broght to Bucharest to administer the assests they had been entrusted with, a part of the Transnistrian Romanian population who were to be brought to the counties of Cetatea Alba and Chilia to replace the German colonists, and those non-Romanian inhabitants of Transnistria who wished refuge. For the latter, the Great General Staff, by address no. 698894 of March the 11th, 1944, assigned the following areas in western Romania:

For the population of Moghilev, Jugastru and Tulcin counties, Curtici plasa [a territorial division unit, ranking below county and above commune] in Arad county, where 6777 people can be accommodated

For the population of Balta and Rabnita counties, Sannicolaul Mare plasa in Timis Torontal county, where 11233 people can be accommodated

For the population of judetele Golta and Ananiev counties, Periam plasa in Timis Torontal county, where 13466 people can be accommodated

For the population of Berezovka and Oceacov counties, Jim- bolia plasa in Timis Torontal county, where 7307 people can be accommodated

For the population of Dubasari and Tiraspol counties, Ciulvaz plasa in Timis Torontal county, where 8945 people can be accommodated

For the population of Odesa and Ovidiopol counties, Ceacova plasa in Timis Torontal county, where 6593 people can be accommodated. [2, f. 136] This upper limit of refugees was never reached, their number being significantly lower.

A report regarding the organization of the evacuation, between 25 January and 15 March 1944, says: “there have been established the admittance criteria for the evacuation of that part of the population, besides the public servants, who might be exposed to deportation or extermination by the enemy.” (1892)

The evacuation actions started in the first half of March 1944, in the emergency areas, established based on their proximity to the front. The goal, which was finally reached, was to limit the evacuation actions to the areas situated outside the Targu Frumos - Iasi - Chisinau-Cetatea Alba strategic line. The secondary option was to retreat on the Focsani - Galati line. Once the front stabilised on this line, the servants in the regions under the control of the Romanian authorities (who had left already) received the order to get back to their duty immediately.

The evacuation unfolded with difficulty. All the available trains were used and as most of them had a stop in Bucharest, this overcrowded the capital. Moreover, for the counties on this side of the Dniester, marching columns were organized and closely monitored till they reached their destination points.

In the case of Transnistria, the situation was complicated by the Germans' request to evacuate, temporarily, the German minority situated east of the Dniester and the allies of other ethnic backgrounds to Romania. The number of these refugees was estimated between 60,000 and 130,000. The German population was to be placed in the former German colonies in southern Bessarabia. These requests were categorically rejected by Ion Antonescu who motivated again that he can not accept foreigners on Romanian territory as long as he did not accept Romanians and that the colonies in Bessarabia were ment for Romanian population. In the end, the agreed solution was to allow the refugees with German pass to be gathered in the Ismail and Chilia ports areas and, from here, to be shipped on the the Danube to German territory'Order 54915 of 18th March 1944: The Great General Staff approved on March 19th the entrance on Bessarabian territory of the German refugee columns from Transnistria through Dubasari, Tighina and Cetatea Alba. March 27th, the German refugees are embarked at Ismail and Chilia [2, f. 219], [4, f. 69]..

The Romanians (Moldavians), estimated to approximately 10,000 people, crossed the Dniester in columns, settled in the villages in southern Bessarabia that had been deserted by the Germans in 1940. The action was supervised by Anton Golopentia and Nichita Smochina, the leader of the Transnistrian Romanians who, between 15 and 17 March, was on a mission in Transnistria and Odessa where he gathered documents regarding the occupation period which were to be used later by the Romanian government. In a statement addressed to marshal An- tonescu, Smochina suggested that all Moldavians should be crossed over the Dniester for fear of Soviet retaliation [5, f. 2].

In the case of the Transnistrian population that was to be evacuated to western Romania, the means of transportation was the train alonf the Odessa-Tighina-Romanesti-Galati-Urziceni-Bucuresti route so as, later on, other trains might take them to Timis county via Craiova [4, f. 66].

During the conference of the ministries council on March the 6th 1944, Prime Minister Mihai Antonescu mentioned that “a whole series of people were evacuated from Transnistrian without consulting the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or asking for approval from the marshal according to case.” Under these circumstances, Mihai Antonescu gave dispositions that the Great General Staff should “take the most severe steps to control the activity and political attitude of these people.” On his turn, the Minister of Internal Affairs, General Vasiliu, explained that these people pose no danger in terms of general security as they had been dispersed and overwatched [4, f. 61-62]. However, a detailed check of the refugees from Transnistria was ordered.

According to a report dated August 28th 1944, the situation of the Transnistrians and east of the Bug refugees was the following:

In southern Bessarabia, the Transnistrian Romanians were colonized as follows: 1201 families with 4544 people in Cetatea Alba county and 3947 families with 3947 people in Chilia county; a total of 8491 people. In addition, in Chilia county there other 200 people were retained as they had enetered Romanian territory illegally or caring German documents. Moreover, there were approximately 500 Tartars and Russians in Constanta county brought by the German troops [3, f. 443] 6

The rest of the population coming from Transnistria and from east of the Bug was estimated to 6240 people who were distributed in counties as follows [3, f. 444-445]: People of German, Russian and especially Tartar ethnicity were brought by the German authorities to Constanta region. Part of the refugees settle in the area, others stay in the camp waiting to leave to Germany. On August 19^th 1944, the Constabulary reported that 195 people had been sent to Germany on July 18^th. The Tartars settled in Constanta were 485. There were 42 more people waiting to leave soon and 147 had still to be gathered in the camp for departure [3, f. 472].

Of these, 960 family heads were distributed to various factories under the General Secretary of Asset Administration (the former Transn-istrian Government) and 13 to the CRICOM financial and industrial organisation (placed in Peri§, Ilfov). The rest, mentions the document, “work wherever they can to support their living.”2

As one can see, most Transnistrian refugees were in the Banat area because this region was assigned to them through the plan of the Great General Staff. Particular aspects about the situation of these refugees are to be found in a detailed report made by the Constabulary on May 9th 1944 after having undertaken control ations in Timis Torontal, Arad and Severin counties. The controls resulted in the following situation [3, f. 1]:

have the honour toreport that as faras this issue signalled by the State Subsecretary for ASmimsgradian, regardingthe presence rn Momita county of an alarming number of Ukrainian and Russian prisoners,practor operatons and refugees, Prime Minister Mihai Aitonescu has decided that these prisoners should stay in me county till he end of me agricultural works but they should be rigorously supervised and, after that, they will be taken out of me county” [5, f. 232] . Still in Ialomita, in Cuza Voha commune, mere were two Traisnistiiai refugees, the priests Grafceico Alexandre and Duna! loan. They wereover 60 yumm old and did notknow Romanian. They hyoid on the help offered by idic: Cmarasi rank. The Ministery of the Rehgious Affairs was requested to accept them in a mooiastery where meM couTd nA takmh Chare oh [3, f. is7(r] .

ANIC, the ConsuaOulaiy GeneM Inspestoratefond,fikt 158l19h4, Is is-ri-n. On July 21st 1944, Snllowmg ithe dh^sheositions givenby Mmm Antone scu sun June 23rd 1944, me State Subrecretary for Adпumstnationreni ar the Prime Minsiiesthe ntnerical tale of the evMcuees from Mokhova, Bucovma anol Tnmsnisriia accordmg to their professions |5, f. 23 4423 5]:

Further on, the report explained the problem of the checked authorisations. Thus, the informal authorisations had been issued by people unauthorised formally to authorise Transnistrian people to enter the country. There were 159 authorisations for 300 people. Most of them (39) had been signed by Anton Golopentia on behalf of the prefecture of the Cetatea Alba county to some Russians who were not supposed to cross the Dniester and to some Moldavians who were supposed to remain in Bessarabia. The fake authorisations had been falsified and trafficked in Odessa; the ones that had been caught with such authorisations were mainly Armenians. The illegal authorisations referred to those authorisations issued by the General Direction of Transnistrian Government Administration which were exclusively addressed to Romanian citizens in order for them to come back into the country and which were found in the possession of people who were not Romanian citizens. In this particular case, the authorisation had been signed by Ilie Popescu, former servant at the Transnistrian Government - Direction of Industry [3, f. 2-4].

Besides the statistics referring to the legal residence status in Romania, the Constabulary also compiled a statistics of the refugees according to their profession [2, f. 413-418]:

The report ended with a number of considerations regarding the legal status of the refugees, the problem of their sustenamce and the danger they might have represented in terms of national security.

Thus, those with non-formal authorisations were to stay “without the possibility of getting back and the total number of evacuees could not go over the number established by the Ministery of Internal Affairs.” Those with false authorisations were to be arrested and trialed, those with German authorisations handed to the German authorities and those without authorisations were to be considered clandestine, gathered and sent to work under supervision. All the unchecked ones (those who had run away from the transport convoys from Odessa to Timisoara, those taken from stations by different people and brought to other settlements than those established by the MIA or the drivers who came with the car convoys) were to be taken to Timis Torontal county.

As far as the establishment of their legal status was concerned, the refugees were to receive a refugee card based on their identity documents and authorisations. In Banat there were two categories of people: in Tolvadia there were Romanian (Moldavian) students from the Odessa University. They were to receive the refugee card on the basis of their student card and the evacuation authorisation issued on basis of the list made by the dean of the Romanian Culture Section of the Odessa University, Miss Djonat. The other refugees were to receive the refugee card on the basis of their Soviet passport.

In the students' case, there were some problems as some people whose ethnicity was not Romanian had infiltrated them and some people had been substituted (see photos). The leader of the group of students from Tolvadia, Vasile Bileschi, explained to the Romanian authorities that some Romanian students had preferred to remain in Transnistria with their families and the management of the Romanian Culture Section had accepted other non-Romanian students or young people to take their place under their names [3, f. 1].

From the perspective of ensuring the material needs, all refugees had been well accommodated. The feeding was done individually, for those who could afford it, or through the local canteens founded by the cityhalls where the refugees could eat at low prices. In Tolvadia commune there was a canteen for students which served food for free [3, f. 7].

Most refugees had no job due to the fact that they could not find work suitable for their qualifications in their communes. Many were complaining that the material resources were about to finish rather soon. Only a small part, 5-6 specialists, had found work in the industrial factories while others were working for the Swabian peasants (German) in the region who offered them just food, fact which generated dissatisfaction. The refugees went to the authorities asking for help to find a job or to be supported into founding production shops (buttons, sweets, etc.) to make a living.

The Constabulary also draw attention to the fact that a significant part of the university staff as well as the Odessa opera staff were in Timisoara region. The artists of the Odessa opera had been scattered in the villages around Timisoara and they did not have the possibility to either practice their profession or to produce anything. They asked to be gathered together in one settlement, preferably Liebling, where there was a larger hall, to rehearse. They asked to be allowed to have jobs at the Timisoara opera and, if that was not possible, to be hired by the cityhall in Arad which had offered to form an opera and ballet theatre withem in Arad.

As for order and security, the Constabulary warned that the state of uncertainty and lack of occupation might generate dissatisfaction. Moreover, in the evacuation area of the Transnistrian refugees there were also Soviet prisoners, still loyal to Stalin, who met these refugees at work. The prisoners considered the refugees as “proteges of the Romanian bourgeoisie, who had run from communist Russia. When Russia wins and the moment will come, these prisoners used to say, all those evacuated by the Romanians must die” [3, f. 5].

The reports made by the constabulary were the basis on which the government discussed, in the following months, the situation of the Transnistrian refugees. Thus, in the ministers' council in May 1944, presided by the Prime Minister, Mihai Antonescu, the minister of National Culture, Ion Petrovici, brought up the situation of the former rector of the Odessa University, doctor Ceasovnicov, who had received in the meantime Romanian citizenship. The latter requested to be hired in the Romanian higher education system but Petrovici explained that, from a legal point of view, this was very difficult to accomplish. Instead, one suggested that Ceasovnicov should be employed in the medical system as a surgeon and later on to identify the legal framework so he can be paid: “It would be a pity that this man, said Petrovici, who can no longer go back to his country, who displayed a hostile attitude to bolshevism from the very first moment, who has refuged in our country and asked for Romanian citizenship, who is very valuable and can provide a great service to the sick and wounded, could not be used” [9, p. 143].

At the council on May 29th 1944, presided by the same Mihai Antonescu, they discussed the report on the situation of the Transnistrian refugees in Banat. Prime Minister showed that they were people “who helped our army and administration, who during the Romanian occupation tightly cooperated with our institutions” [9, p. 210].

The Minister of Internal Affairs, General Constantin Vasiliu, showed that the refugees are gradually given jobs, especially the engineers and technicians, and they can consequently leave the evacuation area. Much more difficult was the situation for university professors and the Odessa opera staff. The Prime Minister gave orders that those who have not been found a job yet should be further supported by supplying them with the money and food necessary for sustenance [9, p. 211]. Moreover, he orderd Minister Ion Petrovici to send a committee to Timis Torontal county to solve the problem of hiring refugees: “till we find a use for these people, they should be given means of sustenance so as not to transform a protection measure into a humiliating measure with a deplorable ending” [9, p. 211]. Mihai Anto- nescu reiterated this disposition in the June 19th meeting as well, when he was asking data about the concrete measures that had been taken. On this occasion, he underlined the fact that these people had to be protected so they do not get to be killed in case of a Soviet invasion, mentioning the rumour according to which one of the most appreciated lead singers of the Odessa opera, Savcenko, stayed and the Soviets hanged him [9, p. 313].

The discussion about the situation of the Transnistrian refugees was revisited at the council on June 21st which was presided by Ion Antonescu himself. He mentioned the fact that there were more than 35,000 soviet subjects in Banat, most of them prisoners working in agriculture, considered potential Bolshevik propagandists. Always preoccupied by the national question, the marshal opinated that a number this large of “Russians” in an area close to Serbia could generate a “neo-Slavik” danger for Romania: “The Serbian will be a Serbian and, no matter how big the danger of the Russian communism might be, the Serbian is interested in the Slavik issue and would rather live in a Slavicized Europe than a Germanized or Romanianized or fascisized one or what ever kind one might think of' [9, p. 338]. Consequently, the marshal suggested that all Soviet prisoners should be evacuated from Banat. However, those who sought refuge from the Bolshevik danger should be helped to settle down. Ion Antonescu met some of them, considering them as nice people who want to work and stay in Romania, preferring this country over Germany: “We must take into account these great tragedies of mankind, said Antonescu. We could consider them (the Slavs) as enemies of the Romanian people because they want to slavicize us but we have to behave humanly ... solve this problem as fast as possible because these people have become to wish us well. If we keep them in this situation (without a job), they will become our enemies . We need their work as they are very hardworking and skilful in their profession. And we have great needs” [9, p. 339].

In the following discussions, the ministers reported the progress made in hirring the Transnistrian refugees. On this occasion, the marshal mentioned the value of the Odessa ensemble and his regret for Savcenko's death, who “left himself persuaded by the Soviet propaganda and stayed in Odessa.” Antonescu was concerned because the Germans were already trying to convice the Odessa artists to go to Germany and he wanted to avoid this. He suggested a plan, embraced by the ministers, that for the time being the artists should give concerts in Timisoara and later on, through a credit offered by the Ministry of Finances, they should go on a tour around the country.9

All these initiatives were stopped by the collapse of the front in Moldova in August 1944. The armistice Convention of September 11th 1944, signed between Romania and the ally states, stipulated in article 5, paragraph 2, that the Soviet and ally citizens, forcefully commited or moved as well as those refuged in Romania who wanted to be repatriated, had to enlist in certain centres in order to receive material support from the Romanian authorities. The Minister of Internal Affairs issued order 3172/1944 which detailed the procedure of filling the statements and organizing the repatriation. The deadline for these requests was no later than October 20th 1944 [3, f. 512, 517-519]. By order 3752 of October 24th 1944, the Minstery of Internal Affairs disposed that the statements should be filled only by those who wish to be repatriated to USSR and that those who do not wish this should not do it [3, f. 513]. It was an attempt of the Romanian authorities to limit the abuses regarding “repatriation”, the Soviet authorities trying to get to the USSR all those who had been born east of the Prut while at least most Bessarabian Romanians wanted to remain on Romanian territory, this was wished by members of other ethnic backgrounds as well, who did not see their future in the USSR, many of them being anti-communists. A real hunt against the latter started and the Romanian authorities could not stop it as the Control Allied Committee, which was superviseing the situation in Romania, was dominated by the Soviet generals. Thus, many of those who left Transnistria in the spring of 1944 were arrested, sent to the USSR and sentenced to death as “traitors”. On the basis of the names identified in the archives and

As a result of the steps taken by the government, by order 6918/7 June 1944 of the Minstery of Internal Affairs, the following artists of the Odessa opera wer allowed to remain in Timisoara: Mihail Constantinov, Ioan Umantiv and Antoniana Rangeva [3, f. 213].

through the cooperation of Romanian and Ukrainian historians, some of these destinies might be reconstituted.

Размещено на Allbest.ru