Saving Of Jews By Ordinary Citizens Within World War Two Croatia – A New Academic Paper

Several studies have been exploring efforts to help and rescue Jews across occupied Europe during World War II and I have been writing about that in my articles from time to time since 2011. The topic of rescuing Jews in the World War Two Independent State of Croatia/NDH is, however, a relatively new one and we have been as a nation very fortunate that Dr Esther Gitman had for the past two decades researched and addressed that topic very comprehensively.

During the past fortnight a new research-based overview Academic Paper of efforts in the rescue of Jews on the territory of Independent State of Croatia by Andrijana Perkovic Palosa and Marin Pelaic has been published under the title “Individual attempts to help Jews in Independent State of Croatia (NDH): petition letters by ordinary Croats” by Routlege (Taylor and Francis Group) within their realm of Holocaust Studies. This very engaging and compelling paper may be accessed via this link.

We discover in this paper that besides the Catholic Church representatives such as Archbishop of Zagreb, Blessed Alojzije Stepinac and a number of associations or civil groups even “Ordinary Croats often requested to exempt their Jewish spouses, friends, neighbors, colleagues, co-workers, and employers from wearing Jewish sign, to grant them ‘Aryan rights’ or to release them from concentration camps. In addition to that, distinguished people from cultural life of Croatia also pleaded for their Jewish colleagues to be released from camps due to their significant contribution to Croatian culture. (Esther) Gitman emphasized that during the first several months of the NDH (WWII Independent State of Croatia), these petitions and other efforts to save Jews ‘were daily occurrences.’ They were mostly addressed to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Ustasha Police, Great Prefects that led the administrative units in NDH called Great Parishes [not to be confused with territorial entities in Christian denominations], Eugen (Dido) Kvaternik – head of the Ustasha Police – and (Ante) Pavelić himself…”

After the authors of this Academic Paper had reportedly examined the petitions devised to save Jews more thoroughly, they gradually noticed some patterns in their content, that is in the argumentation their senders used to persuade the authorities to exempt some Jews from wearing Jewish sign, to grant them ‘Aryan rights’ or to release them from camps. Hence, the authors categorized the documents in accordance with the arguments they contained. As the authors embarked upon categorisation of petitions, they write that they realised that most of the arguments emphasised human and professional qualities of those Jews on whose behalf the petitions had been written, which were in severe contrast to the antisemitic propaganda from two Zagreb’s most influential newspapers – Novi list and Hrvatski narod, that followed the propaganda template of Nazi occupation of Croatia.

With the wealth of material and documents the authors examined that are listed in the Notes and References section of their Paper, it is praiseworthy to see that an array of the documents was provided for their research by Dr Esther Gitman and that contribution is therein acknowledged.

The authors created six categories of petitions according to the arguments the petitioners and signatories used. Each of the arguments from the petitions directly stands in opposition to one or more of the antisemitic propaganda statements, as can be seen on the following Screenshot of Table 1 in the Academic Paper. The categories of petitions to save Jews by ordinary citizens identified are listed as follows, and each is comprehensively explained in the Paper and provides clear and detailed insight into the efforts to save Jews:

  • Category 1: Jews who contributed to Croatian economy.
  • Category 2: Jews who were good employers to Croatian girls and women who worked in their households.
  • Category 3: Jews who provided financial help to Croats/Jews who were in financial difficulties.
  • Category 4: Jews who were Croatian patriots.
  • Category 5: Jews who contributed to the Croatian culture.
  • Category 6: miscellaneous category (The last ‘miscellaneous’ category refers to those petitions containing a new argument or two or more above arguments that stand in opposition to several or all antisemitic propaganda statements).
Examples of antisemitic statements and petitioners for saving of Jews counter arguments

Reading this Academic Paper will add significantly to the historical knowledge about saving and rescuing Jews in World War Two Independent Croatia, which is an equally important topic as the tragic end thousands of Jews met during the times of sweeping exterminations based on racial laws. Ina Vukic

Disclaimer, Terms and Conditions:

All content on “Croatia, the War, and the Future” blog is for informational purposes only. “Croatia, the War, and the Future” blog is not responsible for and expressly disclaims all liability for the interpretations and subsequent reactions of visitors or commenters either to this site or its associate Twitter account, @IVukic or its Facebook account. Comments on this website are the sole responsibility of their writers and the writer will take full responsibility, liability, and blame for any libel or litigation that results from something written in or as a direct result of something written in a comment. The nature of information provided on this website may be transitional and, therefore, accuracy, completeness, veracity, honesty, exactitude, factuality and politeness of comments are not guaranteed. This blog may contain hypertext links to other websites or webpages. “Croatia, the War, and the Future” does not control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness or completeness of information on any other website or webpage. We do not endorse or accept any responsibility for any views expressed or products or services offered on outside sites, or the organisations sponsoring those sites, or the safety of linking to those sites. Comment Policy: Everyone is welcome and encouraged to voice their opinion regardless of identity, politics, ideology, religion or agreement with the subject in posts or other commentators. Personal or other criticism is acceptable as long as it is justified by facts, arguments or discussions of key issues. Comments that include profanity, offensive language and insults will be moderated.