Divided by war, united by welfare: the International Labour Organization promoting war invalids’ internationalism

ABSTRACT

Veterans’ and war invalids’ organizations were – nationally and internationally – among the biggest social movements of the interwar period. While at first organised on a national level, many of them discovered international platforms to promote their interests. This article explores the relationship between the veterans’ and war invalids’ movement and the International Labour Organization (ILO). By undertaking a thorough analysis of the files of the Central European archives as well as archives of the League of Nations and the ILO, it traces how veterans’ and war invalids’ issues became a matter of labour politics. In this process, the article argues, war invalids – instead of veterans – became the core target group of the ILO’s engagement in the field. This went hand in hand with an increasing fixation on labour and welfare. Focusing on the war invalids’ political positioning between pacifism and revisionism, it follows back the preconditions of the founding of Conférence Internationale des Associations des Mutilés et Anciens Combattants (CIAMAC) in 1925, hinting specifically at the importance of East Central and South Eastern European organizations and activists, who are often neglected in the shadow of the more outspoken French and German communities.

KEYWORDS:

• Veterans
• invalids
• First World War
• International Labour Organization (ILO)
• CIAMAC
• ILO Archives
• photo collection

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. We use the term ‘war invalid’ instead of ‘disabled veteran’ or others, as it was used by international organizations. The ILO in particular used the term ‘invalid’ not only for war invalids, but also for others who had lost the ability to work (e.g., after industrial injuries). ‘War invalid’ was defined by national laws; mostly it referred to wounded soldiers, while the term ‘people harmed by war’ embraced their dependent family members as well as the widows and orphans of fallen soldiers.

2. Geyer, “Ein Vorbote des Wohlfahrtstaats,” 230–77 (236); Goltermann, Opfer, 142–3; and Honneth, “Umverteilung als Anerkennung,” 129–224.

3. For a discussion of a/political veterans, see: Eichenberg, “Veterans’ Associations,” and Moyd, “Radical Potentials, Conservative Realities,” 88–107.

4. Gregory, The Silence of Memory; and Barr, The Lion and the Poppy.

5. On the dominant experience of defeat, see: Gerwarth, The Vanquished, on veterans: Ziemann, Contested Commemorations, on invalids: Löffelbein, Ehrenbürger der Nation.

6. Rodgers et al., eds., The International Labour Organization and the Quest for Social Justice; and Kott and Droux, eds., Globalizing Social Rights.

7. Special Issue: Boeckh and Stegmann, eds., “Veterans and War Victims in Eastern Europe during the 20th Century: A Comparison.”

8. Eichenberg and Newman, eds., The First World War and Veterans’ Internationalism.

9. Maul, The International Labour Organization, 62–3. The pathbreaking and integrative edited volume by Kott and Droux discusses ILO and social rights, but neglects the link to ex-servicemen’s organizations. Kott and Droux, eds., Globalizing Social Rights.

10. On the impact of the Versailles order on Eastern Europe, see M. Payk, Frieden durch Recht?, chap. 5, 3. Horne, “Beyond Cultures of Victory and Cultures of Defeat?,” 207–22, (217); and Sierpowski, “Liga Narodów w ‘okresie niemieckiem,” 209–22.

11. Jarząbek used the notion of ‘old’ and ‘new’ states, arguing that the commemoration in the new states differed fundamentally from the ‘old.’ Even though we do not share this idea, we are using the notion to underline the difference which the legionnaires’ engagement in the theatres of the First World War nevertheless made when it comes to heroism and nationalism; Jarząbek, “The Victors of a War that Was Not Theirs,” 83–105 (85–92): see also Jarząbek, Legioniści I inni. While Jarząbek addresses Poland and Czechoslovakia as new states, Yugoslavia also fits into this category; Hungary, Austria, Bulgaria and Romania are each single cases, which cannot be addressed this way.

12. Old states, meaning here those which had existed before the war and still did so.

13. Maul, International Labour Organization, 42–54; Glenda Sluga, Internationalism in the Age of Nationalism (= Pennsylvania Studies in Human Rights), Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013.

14. Stegmann, “Versehrte Bürger,” forthcoming.

15. Alcalde, “War Veterans as Transnational Actors,” 492–511; and Alcalde, War Veterans and Fascism.

16. Böhler, Borodziej, and von Puttkamer, eds., Legacies of Violence.

17. Geyer, “Ein Vorbote des Wohlfahrtstaats.”

18. The Italian case is quite specific in this context as Italy was victorious and revisionist, see: Salvante, “The Italian Associazione Nationale Mutilati e Invalidi du Guerra and Ist International Liaisons,” 165–6; The early-established fascist regime indeed collaborated with international organizations such as the ILO, see: Gallo, “Dictatorship and International Organizations,” 152–71 (162).

19. Horne, “Beyond.”

20. Schivelbusch, Die Kultur der Niederlage.

21. Eichenberg and Newman, “Introduction,” The First World War and Veterans’ Internationalism, 1–15.

22. Horne, “Beyond,” 216–20.

23. Peterson, “Empires, States and the League of Nations,” 113–18, 134–5.

24. The most convincing calculation for Poland, leading up to about 2,000,000 argued by Wandycz, “Se remobiliser pour renaître,” 307–28; Dudek, “Polish Military Formations,” 454–70 (455); for Czechoslovakia: Zückert, Zwischen Nationsidee und staatlicher Realität, 84–5, 111.

25. Dudek, ‘Polish Military Formations in World War I’, in: Béla K. Király, Nándor F. Dreisziger, (eds.), East-Central European Society in World War I. New York: Boulder, 1985, 59; Urbanek, “Kwestia pomocy dla polskich kombatantów Wielkiej Wojny w latach,” 327–41. For Czech and Slovak soldiers, see: Frankenberger, “Čeští vojáci ve světové válce,” 3; Luptak, “Veterans of the Great War,” 2; and Hutečka, Men under Fire.

26. Eichenberg, Kämpfen für Frieden und Fürsorge, 36–9; Kossewska, Związek Legionistów Polskich.

27. Stegmann, “Versehrte Bürger.” For the myths of being victorious nations, compare Newman, “Volunteer Veterans and Entangled Cultures,” 716–36; and Zückert, “Memory of War and National State Integration,” 111–21.

28. In Poland, the Association of War Invalids of the Polish Republic (ZIWRP) was the dominant voice for invalids, widows and orphans. After the 1926 coup d’état, a competing invalid association (Legia) was established and aimed at a further politization in favour of the Sanacja regime. However, it peaked at 8000 (1928) members and lost all impact after the establishment of the centralized veterans’ umbrella organization FPZOO in 1928, which also included ZIWRP. Eichenberg, Kämpfen für Frieden und Fürsorge, 44–5.

29. Eichenberg, Kämpfen für Frieden und Fürsorge, 93–3; and Stegmann, “Social Benefits and the Rhetoric of Peace,” 118–35 (119–26).

30. Maul, International Labour Organization, 63. For more detail on rehabilitation, see: Anderson and Perry, “Rehabilitation and Restoration,” 227–51.

31. Kott, “Constructing a European Social Model,” 173–95.

32. Verstrate, Salvante, and Anderson, “Commemorating the Disabled Soldier”; Anderson, War Disability and Rehabilitation in Britain; and Eichenberg, Kämpfen für Frieden und Fürsorge, 101–66; and Stegmann, Kriegsdeutungen, Staatsgründungen, Sozialpolitik. Der Helden- und Opferdiskurs in der Tschechoslowakei 1918–1948. München: Oldenbourg, 2010.

33. Steiner, The Lights that Failed; Horne, “The European Moment,” 223–40.

34. Kott and Droux, “Introduction,” Globalizing Social Rights, 1–14.

35. SdN, R. 1595 General 1919–1927, Registry 40/18890/17591 and 40/19687/1795: Pension de Guerre.

36. Eichenberg, Frieden und Fürsorge, 106–16.

37. Schaper, Albert Thomas, Trente ans de réformisme social, Préface de M. Marius Moutet. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1959.

38. Horne, Labour at War, 386–94; and Guerin, Albert Thomas au BIT.

39. https://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/how-the-ilo-works/ilo-director-general/former-directors-general/WCMS_192709/lang–en/index.htm (accessed August 21, 2019).

40. For more information on Drummond see Rovine, The First Fifty Years, 17–151; Barros, Office without Power; Barros, “The Role of Eric Drummond,” 31–41.

41. Letter October 7, 1922, from Albert Thomas to Monsieur le Secrétaire général de la SdN regarding the petitions of veterans and invalids. SdN, R. 1595 General 1919–1927, Registry 40/23984/17591: Invalides de Guerre.

42. Letter October 18, 1922 from Eric Drummond to Albert Thomas, ILO. SdN, R. 1595; General 1919–1927, R. 40/23984/17591: Invalides de Guerre.

43. Letter Albert Thomas, ILO, to Eric Drummond, SdN, November 11, 1922. “Je ne dissimule pas que l’établissement de relations entre des hommes qui ont combattu les uns contre les autres pendant la guerre est une opération délicate. La présence de mutilés et d’anciens combattants allemands donnera sans doute lieu a une opposition assez vive de la part de certains groupements des pays alliés, cependant, j’ai la conviction que des négociations, peut- etre longues, nous permettront d’établir un programme définitif et de fixer une date, d’accord avec les grandes associations de mutilés et d’anciens combattants.” SdN, R. 1595 General 1919–1927, R. 40/23984/17591: Invalides de Guerre.

44. Alcalde, “War Veterans as Transnational Actors,” 495–7.

45. Prost, In the Wake of War, 75–6.

46. Maitron and Pennetier, eds., Dictionnaire biographique du mouvement ouvrier français, 238–9; and Prost and Winter, René Cassin and Human Right, 54–6.

47. Prost, Les anciens combattants, 76.

48. Viala, Les relations internationales, 18.

49. Letter November 21, 1921. SdN, R. 1595 General 1919–1927; Registry 40/17591/17591: Pension de Guerre.

50. Résulution adaptée par la Conference sur la proposition de M. Godard, ILO Archives, [Geneva,] MU 1/3/1; and Viala, Les relations internationales, 20.

51. International Labour Office, Geneva February 28, 1921, Institution of a Disabled Branch at the International Labour Office, ILO Archives, MU 1/1/1.

52. L’organization permantente du travail et les mutiles (document from the end of 1920 or the beginning of 1921), ILO Archives, MU 1/1/1. Le placement des invalides. Réunion d’experts pour l’étude d’organization du placement des invalides (Geneva, 31 Juliet, 1er et 2 Aout 1923), Geneva: Bureau International du travail 1923. War invalid issues were not part of the ILO conventions; nevertheless, the CIAMAC constantly compared national legislations, and used this material for negotiations with national governments.

53. Private, December 30, 1921; My dear Butler (including answer), ILO Archives, MU 7/2/2.

54. Press cuttings, addresses, resolutions of FIDAC from New Orleans (October 14–15, 1922): in: SdN, R. 1595 General 1919–1927, Registry 40/23984/17591: Invalides de Guerre.

55. Note from Eric Drummond to the SdN Secretariat, December 9, 1922, PR material should be sent to veterans’ organizations with confirmed addresses, explicitly mentioning info material on ‘Resolutions on Disarmament.’ SdN, R. 1595 General 1919–1927, Registry 40/23984/17591: Invalides de Guerre.

56. Tixier, Chef du Service des mutilés au Bureau International du Travail: L’Organization de la Paix et les anciens combattants, in: SdN, R. 1595 General 1919–1927, Registry 40/23984/17591: Invalides de Guerre.

57. SdN, R. 1339, Public Information, Registry 22/30323/12594; Registry 33/59176/12594; Registry 22/25482/25481; Registry 22/44694/25482; Registry 22/60064/25482.

58. See for example the correspondence with the German associations: ILO Archives, MU 3/2/24.

59. ILO Archives, MU 3/1/17. A (French) letter to Bratislava seemly was not answered; Tixier reported to Thomas a letter to Belgrade has not been answered, too, see: ILO Archives, MU 7/4/2, April 14, 1923, Note pour M. le Direteur.

60. Reichenberg, 4. Feber [sic] 1921, to Internationale[s] Arbeitsamt, Abteilung Kriegsgeschädigtenfragen, adressed to “Herrn Tixier in Genf”; ILO Archives, MU 3/1/17; Hnutí československých váleč. Poškozenců; ILO Archives, MU 3/1/17; Berlin, October 15, 1921; letter from Reichsbund der Kriegsbeschädigen, Kriegsteilnehmer und Kriegshinterbliebenen (Bundesvorstand) an Tixier; ILO Archives, MU 3/1/24; Beantwortung des Fragebogens betreffend die Versorgung der Kriegsbeschädigten (without date), ILO Archives, MU 2/1/15.

61. Prost, Les anciens combattants, 70–2, for Cassin: Prost and Winter, Cassin.

62. For the organization, see: Pawlowsky and Wendelin, Die Wunden des Staates, 199–211, for Brandeisz, Pawlowsky and Wendelin, Die Wunden des Staates, 440–1.

63. Jabłonowski, Sen o potędze Polski, 33–5.

64. Salvante, “The Italian Asssociazione.”

65. For Rajchman see: Steffen, “Experts and the Modernization of the Nation,” 574–90, here 579–80; for the meeting see: First Meeting of Experts to study Questions; Geneva, 2nd, 3rd and 4 March 1922 of Disabled Men, ILO Archives, MU 1/3/1.

66. Meeting of Experts for the study of methods of finding employment for Disabled Men, 61–5.

67. Maul, International Labour Organization, 63.

68. Letter from Internationaler Bund der Kriegsbeschädigten, Kriegsteilnehmer und Kriegshinterbliebenen to International Labour Office, November 1, 1920, ILO Archives, MU 3/3/24.

69. Alcalde, “War Veterans as Transnational Actors,” 500–1.

70. Letter from Zentralverband deutscher Kriegsbeschädigter und Kriegshinterbliebener to Disabled Committee, November 26, 1920; MU 3/2/24.

71. von Ossietzky, “Verbreitet Besonnenheit!”, ILO Archives, MU 2/3/24.

72. Viala, Tixier, and Stein, “Deuxième Rapport annuel sur l’activité génerale de la Ciamac,” in CIAMAC 1 (1928), 3–4, 44–72, here 61.

73. Letter from Tixier to Zentralverband, January 16, 1925, ILO Archives, MU 7/20/1.

74. Letter from Austrian Zentralverband to Tixier, March 2, 1925, ILO Archives, MU 7/2/1.

75. Letter from Tixier to Austrian Zentralverband, April 26, 1925, ILO Archives, MU 7/20/1.

76. Letter from Bund to Tixier, 2.6.1925; answer from Tixier June 11, 1925, ILO Archives, MU 7/20/1.

77. Stein was born in Prague and studied in Vienna; see: Rys, “The Role of Osvald Stein (1895–1943).

78. Der Reichsverbund 3 (1925), Nr. 8.

79. Letter from Stein to Reichsbund, July 29, 1925; ILO Archives, MU 3/1/24.

80. Salvante, “The Italian Associazione,” 164.

81. “Satzung der CIAMAC,” 5–10, here 5.

82. Viala, Tixier, and Stein, “Deuxième Rapport,” 54–60.

83. Ibid., 5. Sometimes, one country was represented by different and maybe even politically opposing associations, as for example in the cases of France and Poland.

84. One vote for up to 100,000 members, two votes for 100,000 to 200,000 members, three votes for more than 200,000 members. CIAMAC Statute, Artikel 15–17, ibid., 8.

85. CIAMAC Statute, Artikel 9, 6–7. The war blind were a very active group amongst the war invalids, both in their own associations (such as the League of Polish Association for Blind Soldiers, ZSOŻRP) as well as within the political national sphere or within international organizations, Eichenberg, Kämpfen für Frieden und Fürsorge, 112–13; also see Luptak and Newman, “Victory, Defeat, Gender, and Disability,” 604–19.

86. On Milan Nedić, see: Ramet and Lazić, “The Collaborationist Regime of Milan Nedić_’,” 11–43.

87. For more information on veterans’ internationalism and FIDAC and CIAMAC, Eichenberg and Newman, “Introduction.”

88. Rapports III, CIAMAC, IX. Annual Meeting, Belgrade, September 18–22, 1935, II. Part, Questionnaire on war victims’ policy 1934, 1935.

89. Winter, “Veterans, Human Rights, and the Transformation of European Democracy,” 128–38 (129).

90. Cassin, “Les relations de la Ciamac avec les autres associations internationales qui travaillent pour la paix,” in CIAMAC (1928) 3–4, 88–102 (91–2); and Cassin and Rossmann, “Les conditions actuelles de la paix,” in CIAMAC 3 (1930), 88–97.

91. The choice of German and French as the two languages was, of course, in response to the allied bilingualism of FIDAC in French and English. The inclusion of German was intended to underline the attempt to reconciliate. As when executive board members Viala, Stein and Tixier expressed their wish that principles and activities of their associations would be recognized in the different counties their members came from Viala, Tixier, and Stein, “Deuxième Rapport,” 46–7 and 72.

92. “Die Versorgungsgesetzgebung in den einzelnen Staaten,” 154–62; and “Die Verbände der Kriegsopfer und die Versorgung,” 21–8; Dechamps, “Versorgungsfragen: Der Umfang der Schädigung, die Kriegsopfern Anspruch auf Versorgung verleiht. Bericht an die Pariser Jahresversammlung,” in CIAMAC 2 (1930), 48–62.

93. Maul, The International Labour Organization, 39.

94. Viala, Tixier, and Stein, “Deuxième Rapport,” 47–51.

95. “Résolution sur la situation des victimes de la Guerre en Tchéchoslovaquie,” in: CIAMAC 1 (1928), 5, 154; “Tchéchoslovaquie. Vers un Reglément des pensions de guerre,” in: CIAMAC 3 (1930), 1, 27; “Bulgarie,” in: CIAMAC 2 (1929), 2, 31; “Entschließung über die Lage der Kriegsopfer in der Tschechoslowakei,” in CIAMAC 3 (1930), 4, 112; “Entschließung über die Lage der Kriegsbeschädigten in Rumänien,” ibidem.

96. Tixier‚ “Visite du Secrétaire général de la Ciamac en Bulgarie, en Roumanie et en Hongrie,” 29–32 (30).

97. Secret‚ “Une mission en Europe Centrale et dans les Balkans,” in CIAMAC 6 (1932), 280–3.

98. Viala, Les relation internationale, 26–8, 36–7.

99. Letter from Kikiewicz to Tixier, received May 10, 1921, ILO Archives, MU 3/1/50.

100. “Szanowny druhu” letter Tixier to Kikiewcz, Warsaw, June 27, 1923, ILO Archives, MU 3/1/50.

101. “Mon cher camarade,” letter from Kikiewcz do Tixier, received October 17, 1922, ILO Archives, MU 3/1/50.

102. “Monsieur le Président et cher camarade,” letter from Tixier to Kikiewicz, sent June 10, 1921, ILO Archives, MU 3/1/50.

103. Letter from ZIWRP to Tixier, October 21, 1925, ILO Archives, MU 3/1/50.

104. B[olesław] Kikiewicz, “Inwalidzi państwowotworczym czynnikiem w Polsce,” Inwalida II/36, October 10, 1920; “Czy Ustawa inwalidzka dała inwalidom wojennym I pozostałym to, czego się spodziewali?,” Inwalida III/18, May 1, 1921; ibid., “Czasowe inwalidztwo,” Inwalida VI/26, September 7, 1924, 8–9; ibid. “Spółczesne zadania organizacji inwalidzkiej,” in Inwalida VIII/8, February, 21 1926, 2–3; ibid., “Sprawa Inwalidzka w Traktacie Wersalskim,” Inwalida IX/22, June 5, 1927; ibid., “Sprawa Inwalidzka w Traktacie Wersalskim,” Inwalida IX/24, June 19, 1927, 4–5; ibid., “Zmiana rozporządzenia wykonawczego do Ustawy Inwalidzkiej,” Inwalida X/35, August 26, 1928, 1–2; ibid, “Odprawa wdowia,” Inwalida, XIII/49, December 5, 1931, 2.

105. Karski, The Great Powers and Poland, 31–46; and Gerwarth, The Vanquished, 187–98.

106. Stegmann, “Poland and the Versailles Order,” 286–302.

107. Congres de Berlin, aoȗt 1928, ILO Archives, MU 7/9/5/1.

108. “Po congresie C.I.A.M.A.C.u,” 3; and Congres de la C.I.A.M.A.C., Varsovie, 4,5, et 6 aoȗt 1929, ILO Archives, MU 7/9/5/1.

109. “La collaboration internationale entre les Anciens Combattants et la situation politique en Allemagne,” 155–72. This was a common argument, which had been widely publicised in particular connected to the veterans’ statements at the Disarmament Conference in Geneva in 1933. Eichenberg, Kämpfen für Frieden und Fürsorge, 179–85.

110. “Messages à la IXe assemblée annuelle,” 141–51.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Julia Eichenberg

Julia Eichenberg is a Freigeist Fellow at the University of Bayreuth, and principal investigator of the research project ‘The London Moment’ funded by the Volkswagen Foundation. In 2008, she was awarded a PhD in Modern History by the University of Tübingen for her research on Polish veterans of the First World War. Since then, she has held fellowships and lectured in Modern European History at Trinity College Dublin, University College Dublin and Humboldt University Berlin. She has published widely on war, veterans’ welfare and international collaboration. Her next book engages with the collaboration of European governments-in-exile in London during the Second World War. Her most recent work is “Legal Legwork: How Exiled Jurists Negotiated Recognition and Legitimacy in Wartime London,” in Crafting the International Order: Practitioners and Practices of International Law since c. 1800, edited by by M. Payk and K. Priemel (Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2021) and Zeitgeschichte des Rechts, a Special Issue of Zeithistorischen Forschungen, co-edited with M. Payk, K. Priemel and B. Lahusen, 16 (2019). She is the author of “Kämpfen für Frieden und Fürsorge. Polnische Veteranen des Ersten Weltkriegs und ihre internationalen Kontakte, 1918-1939.” München: Oldenbourg, 2011.

Natali Stegmann

Natali Stegmann holds a PhD in East European History and a habilitation from the University of Tübingen. Her main monographs focus on the history of the Polish women’s movement from 1863 until 1918 as well as on Czechoslovak war victims after the First and Second World Wars. Since 2009 she has held the position of an academic researcher as the chair for South East and East European History at the University of Regensburg. Her research interests include the nineteenth- and twentieth-century history of East Central Europe, gender history, war experiences, social policy and the culture of late socialist societies. Her most recent works are ‘Negotiating Social Needs: Ideas of a Good Life in Late Socialist Poland’, in Outside the ‘Comfort Zone’: Performances and Discourses of Privacy in Late Socialist Europe, edited by Tatiana Klepikova and Lukas Raabe (Munich: De Gruyter Oldenbourg, 2020) and ‘Polen und die International Labour Organization (ILO): Expertenwissen und Verwaltungshandeln im Umbruch von 1919 bis 1926,’ in Střed/Centre 2 (2020), a special issue on ‘Technocracy between Politics and Business, 1918–1989,’ 9–27.