Skip to main content

Reparation Politics and the Question of Differential Success

  • 1409 Accesses

Part of the Springer Series in Transitional Justice book series (SSTJ,volume 7)

Abstract

A redress and reparation norm has developed within international society. This norm obligates states to engage with those that they had victimized. Although the means and ways in which this interaction occurs can often be highly bureaucratic, disenfranchise segments of the population, and even be highly agonistic, states are increasingly entering into these negotiations. Further, we see the demands issued by redress and reparation movements have been gaining recognition and are becoming increasingly successful in obtaining their goals. This engagement can take many forms based on the type of justice it seeks: criminal, historical, reparatory, legislative, and symbolic.

Taking the development of a redress and reparation norm into account, I have sought to examine why, when two victimized groups are attempting to seek justice, there is a differential achievement of their goals, especially when both groups have been subjected to similar atrocities or injustices. To answer the question, this book explored the historical background of three atrocities and/or structured injustice (genocide, internment, and sexual slavery) committed by state actors (Germany, United States, and Japan respectively). These events occurred primarily during World War II; however, each event was presaged by discriminatory actions such as laws targeting ethnic groups or societal norms that devalued the victimized communities legally and/or socially. Six groups were then examined—two from each country/region—to determine why the different groups, having experienced similar treatment by the state, have achieved varying amount of redress and reparation following the efforts of their corresponding RRMs.

Keywords

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Berg and Schaefer (2009, p. 4).

  2. 2.

    The Genocide Convention came into force in January 1951.

  3. 3.

    Finnemore and Sikkink (1998, p. 893).

  4. 4.

    Maogoto (2003).

  5. 5.

    The United States and the Soviet Union signed the Genocide Convention in 1948 and 1949 respectively. The United States did not ratify the treaty until November 25, 1988. The US, however, tends to be reluctant to sign international treaties in general. The Soviet Union ratified the treaty on May 3, 1954.

  6. 6.

    Hein (2003, p. 132).

  7. 7.

    See Timm (1997).

  8. 8.

    Torpey (2006 , p. 24).

  9. 9.

    Ibid. p. 25.

  10. 10.

    Ibid. p. 2.

  11. 11.

    Including Article 75 of Rome Statute (2002), which stated, “The Court shall establish principles relating to reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. On this basis, in its decision the Court may, either upon request or on its own motion in exceptional circumstances, determine the scope and extent of any damage, loss and injury to, or in respect of, victims and will state the principles on which it is acting.”

  12. 12.

    Hein (2003, p. 134).

  13. 13.

    Quoted in Pross (1998, p. 22).

  14. 14.

    According to the U.S. Census of Population and Housing, 1960: Summary Population and Housing Characteristics.

  15. 15.

    Torpey (2006).

  16. 16.

    Hegburg (2011).

  17. 17.

    Conyers (2013).

  18. 18.

    Human Rights Watch (2004, pp. 2–3).

Bibliography

  • Berg, Manfred, and Bernd Schaefer. 2009. Introduction. In Historical justice in international perspective: How societies are trying to right the wrongs of the past, ed. Manfred Berg and Bernd Schaefer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • John Conyers, Jr. 2013. Issues: Reparations. http://conyers.house.gov/index.cfm/reparations. Accessed Aug. 1, 2013.

  • Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. International norm dynamics and political change. International organization 52 (4): 887–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hein, Laura. 2003. War Compensation: Claims against the Japanese Government and Japanese corporations for war crimes. In Politics and the past: On repairing historical injustices, ed. John Torpey. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegburg, Krista. 2011. What the law does not recall: Repair, ‘Historical Reality,’ and the legal order in the Czech Republic. Rutgers University, Forgotten genocide: Silence, memory, denial (March 29, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Human Rights Watch. 2004. Struggling to survive: Barriers to justice for rape victims in Rwanda. September 2004 vol 16. no. 10 (A).

    Google Scholar 

  • Maogoto, Jackson Nyamuya. 2003. State sovereignty and international criminal law: Versailles to Rome. New York: Transnational Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pross, Christian. 1998. Paying for the past: The struggle over reparations for surviving victims of the Nazi terror. Translated by Belinda Cooper. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timm, Angelika. 1997. Jewish claims against East Germany: Moral obligations and pragmatic policy. Budapest: Central European University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torpey, John. 2006. Making whole what has been smashed: On reparations politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephanie Wolfe .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wolfe, S. (2014). Reparation Politics and the Question of Differential Success. In: The Politics of Reparations and Apologies. Springer Series in Transitional Justice, vol 7. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-9185-9_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics