Finland's aid to the nazi holocaust
Interesting article to understand the Finnish collaboration to aid the nazi's to exterminate the jews.
The first one is but a work of two people, not something coming from international scientific community. "Myth of co-belligerence". There is no myth of co-belligerence, it is a fact. All file talks about is "Finnish aggression and Finnish attack", but there is no mention of the Soviet bombings of major Finnish cities before Finland joined the war. Finland took in a number of jewish refugees, and Finland itself had thousands already living in the nation. Our jews were not persecuted, as a matter of fact, they were fighting in the Finnish army as any other soldiers; they even had field synagogues in which they could practice their religion properly, and a number were even awarded Iron Crosses by the Germans. The case of EIGHT, no more, no less, jews who were turned over to Gestapo is very unfortunate, but it had nothig to do with Finland's "collaboration to aid the nazi's to exterminate the jews". Also, they were not Finnish jews, but foreign. The Finnish goverment solved the situation for good in the year 2000 after formal and appropriate apologies to relevant people.
The other link on the other hand is something that is very known in Finland, and something that tries to paint ridiculous image of Finland. There was no "Finland's aid and collaboration to exterminate jews
"Finland carried out ethnic cleansing, for example, by allowing 3,000 Russians to starve to death."
Finland did not carry out "ethnic cleansigs" (do not think about Auschwitz, other German camps and all racial related crimes everytime you hear the
word ethnic cleansing. It was carried out by the United States among others, including the Soviet Union) in the the sense implied or allow Soviets to starve to death. Soviet people were interned in internment camps because they were enemy aliens, and they were not allowed to starve to death. People died because there was not enough food due to failed harvest in Finland.
Due to loss of fertilizer imports and fifth of arable land the food situation in Finland was difficult. Although some of the needed grain was bought from Germany, Finland was still on the brink of faminy at 1941. The loss of material relevant to food in East Karelia made the situation even more difficult.
The rations which were issued to the camps were standard rations for light workers which has been used in Finland for example in volunteer projects. What was not counted, was that with the shortage of food, also the low quality material were taken into use, with much lower nutritional values than normal stuff. The end result was increased deaths everywhere where that material had to be used, also in Finland proper. In statistics there can be seen increase in deaths in Finland
The question is, were those people murdered by intentionally giving them too little food. The answer to that question is no. So why did they die? The answer to that question is the low quality of the available foodstuff and missing options to improve those lacking rations. Why was the quality then so low? The simple answer to that is the bad harvest, which forced everybody to use for food even those stuff which would have in normal situation used for some other thing, like feeding the cattle, making a glue etc. Even Finns suffered from that in a situations similar like those inside the camps. The failed harvest did not only effect those Soviet citizens who were interned, but also those who were not.
My grandmother whom I visit regulary remembers this situation very well. Among other things, her mother had to use needles of pinophyta species trees as spices and to make tea and "coffee".
The work has been critized by scientific community of being ignorant of the overall research done on the subject during the last 40 years.
Arnstad on the other hand has been stated to grossly simplify the historical processes that led to the Continuation War and totally ignore the impact of the Winter War and the threat posed by the the Soviet Union agains't Finland.
My favorite so far in thing is the following:http://www.hs.fi/english/artic.....5223440307
According to Finnish historian Markku JokisipilÃ¤, Arnstad presents notions that have been discussed in Finland since the 1960s. "I wonder if Arnstad is at all familiar with the debate that has taken place within the Finnish history research on the subject", JokisipilÃ¤ ponders.
"No, I am not", Arnstad admits.
"JokisipilÃ¤ concludes, in reference to the fact that Arnstad's comments are no different from those presented by the left in Finland in the 1960s and 1970s
Henrik Meinander, a well respected historian has written a sharply critical answer to Arnstad's claims that has been published by SvD