War)
International Working Men's Association (see under the international)
Ireland An island lying to the west of Great Britain, four-fifths of which today forms the Republic of Ireland, while the remainder (Northern Ireland) is a province of the United Kingdom (see also Britain and Europe). During the early-modern period the whole of Ireland had come increasingly under English control. Outbreaks of revolt by an indigenous population deeply attached to Catholicism were met by the progressive “plantation” of English (and latterly) Scottish Protestant settlers. While Britain was engaged in the FRENCH REVOLUTIONARY WARS, the unsuccessful rebellions of1796 and 1798 associated with Wolfe Tone (both of which envisaged French assistance) hastened an Act of Union, passed by the Westminster and Dublin parliaments in 1801. There was immediate pressure for political reform, as the three quarters of Ireland’s population which were still Catholic continued to be denied civil equality. After a campaign orchestrated by Daniel O’Connell, Catholic Emancipation was granted in 1829. However, this victory was soon overshadowed by the Great Famine of 1845-9 when the potato crop, the staple diet of a majority of peasants (see also rural society), was hit by disease. This caused the loss of around a million lives, as well as massive migration to mainland Britain and the USA. A population of 8.2 million in the early 1840s fell to a figure of 6.5 million at the 1851 census, and such decline continued at a slower rate throughout the rest of the century. Impoverishment now nurtured a powerful movement of NATIONALISM represented by the Irish Republican Brotherhood, or Fenians, (1858); the National Land League (1879); the Irish Home Rule Party (1880) of Charles Stewart Parnell; and the republican party, Sinn Fein (1902). Several home rule bills foundered on the rock of Conservative and Unionist opposition at Westminster. Even when such an Act was eventually passed in 1914, it also became suspended for the duration of WORLD WAR I. This encouraged militants to initiate the 1916 Easter Rising in Dublin whose subsequent suppression became a fabled part of Irish nationalism.
In December 1921 Dominion status was conceded, with the exception of six of the nine counties which had hitherto comprised the province of Ulster. These principal bastions of Protestant ascendancy remained within the UK, forming a Northern Ireland that possessed some powers of self-government while also sending MPs to Westminster. Across the new border, the Irish Free State (whose population of around 3 million was more than double that of its neighbor) was formally proclaimed in December 1922. However, in the eyes of republicans such as DE VALERA, who became its premier in 1932, this was insufficiently independent of London. A new constitution was introduced in 1937 establishing a sovereign state of Eire which declined to recognize the legitimacy of the Irish partition. Despite its continuing Dominion status, Eire maintained neutrality in world war ii. By 1948 it had effectively left the British Commonwealth, and a year later formalized the break and reconstituted itself as the Republic of Ireland.
Over the following decades this did nothing to assuage nationalist sentiments affronted by the situation in Ulster where Catholics suffered blatant discrimination. Mounting tensions prompted British military intervention from 1969 onward, and eventually “The Troubles” provoked a return to direct rule from London. On January 22, 1972 (“Bloody Sunday”) a battalion of the Parachute Regiment killed 13 civil-rights marchers in Derry/Londonderry. This action (which was initially whitewashed by a hasty judicial inquiry, but eventually became the object of belated official condemnation through the exhaustive Saville report of 2010) contributed towards plunging Northern Ireland even deeper into a lengthy period of sectarian violence and terrorism, involving not only the Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) but also such Protestant paramilitary groups as the Ulster Volunteer Force. The painfully slow “peace process” that allowed escape from the worst of this bitter conflict was eased by the increasing willingness of westminster administrations to involve Dublin too, and landmarks of tortuous negotiation included the Anglo-Irish (Hillsborough) Agreement of 1985 and the Good Friday (Belfast) Agreement of 1998. In essence, by the turn of the millennium the governments both of the UK and of the Republic had come to recognize that, over the longer term, any removal of the 1921-2 partition could only be properly effected by the peaceful agreement of a majority of voters separately recorded in each ofthe two jurisdictions. By 2005 the principal paramilitary contenders had declared an end to their campaigns of armed militancy. Two years later Northern Ireland embarked upon a constantly imperiled attempt to sustain a form of devolved government reliant on tense powersharing between Unionists and Republicans.
Even amid these difficulties the Republic had long maintained close economic ties with the UK, and in 1973 had joined the European Community at the same time as its neighbor (see European integration). This provided an important stimulus towards an unprecedented prosperity, and encouraged a rapid process of social and cultural modernization as well. The resulting pressures towards secularization created tensions with a particularly conservative Catholic hierarchy that had long prided itself on protecting traditional Irish values: early in the new century, its authority was further undermined by revelations about its role in concealing over many years the alarming scale of pedophiliac abuse on the part of clergy. By
2007, with a population of around 4.3 million, the Republic was among the richest members of the European Union (EU), attracting large numbers of immigrants from across the Continent. In June
2008, however, an Irish referendum blocked ratification of the Lisbon Treaty aiming at general reform of the EU’s structures. Shortly thereafter the unanticipated onset of global recession created particularly severe problems for the Irish economy, and this was the principal factor prompting a clear endorsement of Lisbon through a further plebiscite held in October 2009.
Iron Curtain (see under cold war)
Iron Guard This movement (Garda de Fier) embodied the principal manifestation of fascism in ROMANIA. Originally founded by codreanu in 1927 as the Legion of the Archangel Michael, it was renamed three years later. It was inspired by a heady mix of orthodox Christianity, virulent ANTISEMITISM, and extreme nationalism. Enjoying considerable support among the peasantry, as well as students, the Guard was organized on military lines, its members wearing green uniforms so as to symbolize a rebirth of Romania. to its violence and use of terrorism, which included the murder of prime minister Ion Duca in 1933, the Guard was forced underground, whereupon it started to call itself the All For Fatherland Party. It did moderately well in the 1937 elections. The following year the movement suffered a setback when King carol ii established a personal dictatorship. Members of the Guard were imprisoned and Codreanu himself was shot. The Iron Guard took revenge in 1940 when it assisted Marshal ANTONEScu’s seizure of power. Even so, it remained mistrusted by the new dictator. The Guard was eventually suppressed in 1941 and Codreanu’s successor, Horia Sima, was forced into exile.
Irredentism Term deriving from “Italia irredenta” (“unredeemed Italy”), a phrase used in the context of a nationalism that sought to reclaim territories peopled by Italians yet retained by the HABSBURG EMPIRE after 1866. These areas included Trentino, the city of Trieste, the peninsula of ISTRIA, FIUME, and segments of Dalmatia. Their acquisition was one of the key Italian objectives in WORLD WAR I, and figured high among orlando’s demands at the 1919 Paris peace settlement. Most ofthese calls were met, though nationalists viewed matters more critically and in the way that soon prompted d’annunzio’s incursion into Fiume. MUSSOLINI subsequently made much of the notion that Italy had been “stabbed in the back” and denied its due rewards. The term is now used far more broadly, describing any assertion, based on ethnic, historical, or cultural grounds, of a nation’s right to “redeem” territory possessed by another state.
Islam (see Muslims)
Istria Peninsula of the northern Adriatic lying between Trieste and Rijeka (see fiume), now divided between Croatia and slovenia. Following the collapse of the habsburg empire, the 1919 treaty of ST GERMAIN transferred sovereignty over this ethnically complex region to italy. istria, with its substantial slavic population, subsequently became a source of tension with Yugoslavia. It was eventually taken over by TiTo’s regime at the end of World War II. Istria then remained under the rule of Belgrade until Yugoslavia itself was broken up by the civil war of the early 1990s.
Italian unification Nationalist historiography has generally portrayed this as the inevitable product of the risorgimento, an allegedly irresistible process of regeneration successfully harnessed by cavour, garibaldi, and victor Emmanuel II. In truth, however, this political and cultural movement was essentially elitist and riddled with divisions. Among supporters ofunification, there was much hostility between those such as mazzini or the carbonari who strove to achieve it through insurrection and many other patriots who favored more moderate means. Noteworthy too are those who remained suspicious of the whole objective, including catholics anxious to protect the church’s interests (see Catholicism) and denizens of southern Italy who often felt marginalized in every sense. By the late eighteenth century the italian peninsula had long been politically fractured and vulnerable to foreign occupation. in 1789 it comprised no fewer than nine states. NAPOLEON I subsequently redrew the map and gave rise to talk of unity. Yet while the emperor portrayed himself as a liberator, he kept Italy divided lest it should become a threat to France. At the VIENNA congress of 1814-15 its reconfiguration was dictated by reasons of state rather than principles of legitimacy. Austria was entrusted with the Kingdom of Lombardy-Venetia; the Duchies of Parma, Tuscany, Modena, and Lucca were handed to Habsburg and Bourbon princes; and the reconstituted papal states became the base for Austrian garrisons. in the south, the Bourbons were restored to the Kingdom of the two sicilies, but tied into a defensive alliance with vienna. The sole effectively independent state was piedmont-SARDINIA, reshaped as a buffer between France and Austria. This restructuring meant that unification faced a formidable obstacle in the shape of the HABSBURG EMPIRE. France and the Papacy were also generally opposed to integration, though some misguided patriots placed hope in Pius ix around the start of his pontificate in 1846. Geopolitical divisions only reinforced longstanding regional, economic and cultural differences, especially between north and south. Nor was there much linguistic homogeneity, since in the 1850s only 10 percent of the peninsula’s population spoke Italian (essentially Tuscan) as their first language. As metternich had remarked, Italy was as yet merely “a geographical expression.”
The frailties of Italian nationalism were badly exposed in the revolutions of 1848-9. If there was to be some form of unification, this was likely to be promoted by Piedmont-sardinia, which aspired to control the north. Though the Piedmontese bid of 1849 to expel the Austrians from Lombardy was defeated at custozza and novara, such ambitions were sustained by Victor Emmanuel II and by Cavour as his chief minister, both of whom believed in deploying diplomacy as well as force. When involvement in the Crimean war produced no immediate gains, cavour exploited NAPOLEON iii’s sympathies, heightened by the orsini PLOT, and concluded with France the plombiEres AGREEMENT of 1858. This envisaged a military alliance against Austria that would produce, most particularly, a significantly enlarged northern italian state ruled by the House of savoy. in the event, the ensuing franco-austrian war of 1859 (abbreviated by Napoleon’s decision to make peace via the villafranca truce) resulted in Piedmontese annexation only of Lombardy. Conversely, the further promised gain of venetia did not materialize - but, even so, Napoleon insisted on victor Emmanuel transferring Nice and savoy to France, as previously agreed. Having initially resigned over this whole turn of events, Cavour resumed his premiership in January 1860. By then the challenge was to deal with the plebiscites which had been swiftly conceded in the small states of central italy, and which now endorsed union with Piedmont. Developments were then further accelerated and transformed by Garibaldi’s exploitation of a Sicilian rising in May and by the crossing of his “Thousand Redshirts” to the Neapolitan mainland in August. victor Emmanuel and cavour became fearful lest the south, having now been freed from Bourbon misrule, should end up as a Mazzinian republic - something that might trigger foreign intervention and imperil the gains recently registered further north. They dispatched troops southwards to prevent Garibaldi’s advance from reaching Rome, where papal interests were now guarded by a French garrison. On October 26 Victor Emmanuel and Garibaldi met, together with their armies, to transact a tense but peaceful confirmation of Piedmontese royal authority. Early in 1861, endorsed by further plebiscites, a new Kingdom of italy was then proclaimed across most of the peninsula.
This formal unification under Victor Emmanuel had been accomplished through a combination of forces. French assistance had been vital, together with the dynastic ambitions of the House of Savoy and the machinations of Cavour. Garibaldi’s determination, and the support he had mustered in the south, had been equally crucial. Patriotic sentiment had, however, played only a limited role in this whole process, and any sense of distinctively italian identity was further diluted by the campaign of “Piedmontization” pursued in and beyond the 1860s. In so far as Venetia and Rome remained to be “redeemed,” international diplomacy again proved essential. The acquisition of the former would be a side-effect of the austro-prussian war of 1866, while that of the latter (except for the Vatican itself) would stem from French defeat four years later in the franco-prussian war. Though some minor territorial claims remained outstanding, the subsequent feeling (vigorously expressed e. g. both by Mazzini and Garibaldi) of an essentially incomplete unification had more to do with the quality of the nation-building process than with quantitative omissions. As d’azeglio had famously observed, it was one thing to have made Italy, but another to create Italians. This constituted the central challenge of the decades after 1870 (a period more fully reviewed under the separate heading of italy). Most importantly, for the next half-century or so successive papal “prisoners of the Vatican” would continue to undermine the authority of a structure built at the expense of the church’s temporal power; and meanwhile the hegemony of the north would be evident in its alienating treatment of the southern MEZZOGIORNO as a region of semi-colonial status. in the 1920s such political, religious, cultural, economic, and social divisions and tensions were still sufficiently evident for Mussolini to claim, quite plausibly, that much of the task of unification still lay ahead. (See also Map 4)
Italo-Ethiopian War This was launched by MUSSOLINI early in October 1935, and ended with the capture of Addis Ababa in May 1936. The conquest constituted italy’s revenge for the defeat inflicted on her at Adowa in 1896, and confirmed the Duce’s own imperialism. Though the league OF NATIONS condemned his invasion, inclinations towards appeasement (see also hoare-laval pact) severely limited the sanctions actually applied. Meanwhile, techniques of warfare that involved air power, tanks, and poison gas had speeded Italian success against poorly-equipped opponents. Mussolini’s victory further emboldened his foreign policy, which became henceforth more aligned with that of hitler rather than of the STRESA FRONT. Italy’s triumph also enabled victor EMMANUEL III to be proclaimed Emperor of Ethiopia. The deposed ruler, Haile Selassie, fled into exile, but during the course of world war ii reclaimed his imperial throne with British assistance.
Italo-Turkish War This conflict, which lasted from September 1911 until October 1912, demonstrated Italy’s colonial ambitions (see also imperialism). The principal target was Tripolitania (modern Libya), ruled by Ottoman Turkey (see TURKEY AND EUROPE) since the sixteenth century. With the French consolidating their own position in North Africa particularly after the moroccan CRISES, the GIOLITTI government was anxious to benefit from the sultanate’s waning authority by seizing Tripoli. The Italians occupied the key coastal positions within the first month of the war, in a campaign aided by the innovatory use of airplanes. However, they soon found themselves forced to increase their troop numbers to 70,000 in the face of continuing Arab as well as Turkish resistance. The Ottoman position was crucially weakened in May 1912 when Italy took the risk of extending the war to the Aegean and swiftly captured the islands of the Dodecanese. Turkey’s hopes of retrieving the losses both there and in Tripolitania were then dashed through the outbreak of the first of the Balkan wars in October. Libya remained an Italian colony until WORLD WAR II, coming under British military rule in 1943, and eventually achieved independence in 1951; the Dodecanese was ceded by Italy to Greece under the Paris treaty of 1947.
Italy For the pre-1870 period the modern history of this peninsula - bounded to the north by the Alps, and elsewhere principally by the Adriatic, Mediterranean, and Tyrrhenian Seas - is most conveniently treated with reference to ITALIAN UNIFICATION (see also Map 4). The proclamation in 1861 of a unified Kingdom of Italy brought together under the leadership of PIEDMONT-SARDINIA most of the other regions, from Lombardy in the north to the TWO SICILIES in the south. Venetia was added in 1866; four years later victor EMMANUEL II annexed most of the Pope’s remaining temporal domain (see PAPAL STATES) and made Rome his new royal capital. Subsequent Italian history contains three main phases - a period of broadly parliamentary government lasting until 1922; one of dictatorial rule continuing until 1943 (treated principally via further entries on FASCISM and MUSSOLINI); and an ensuing era of democratic restoration.
Though by 1870 the new Italy (with a population of nearly 27 million) was largely complete in formal territorial terms, it still remained poorly unified in other major respects. The Vatican endeavored to turn popular CATHOLICISM into a force hostile to the “liberal” secular state, maintaining until 1904 the self-defeating policy of trying to ban the faithful from voting or engaging in any other brand of political participation. Meanwhile, many of the disparities between the northern part of the peninsula and the southern mezzogiorno were enlarged. Across the Neapolitan and Sicilian regions, where a form of civil war had raged well into the 1860s, extensive lawlessness associated particularly with the MAFIA thrived thereafter in defiance of administrative centralization (otherwise condemned as “Piedmontization”). In parliament, originally elected on a very restrictive property franchise, right-wing administrations held sway from 1861 to 1876. At that point the more radical depretis gained control, and then retained the premiership through most of the period down to 1887. He proved particularly adept at trasformismo, which remained thereafter one of the most persistent features of Italian parliamentary politics. This involved buying off potential opponents with offices, honors, or concessions, and generated a system ofrevolving coalitions whose constant and often corrupt compromises tended to frustrate decisive reformist initiatives. The most important change achieved by Depretis came in 1881, when he secured franchise extension to cover nearly all literate men (though the overall level of literacy itself remained too low thus to produce any universal male entitlement). He was notable too for bringing Italy into a triple alliance with Germany and Austria in 1882, and for exploring the potentialities of a colonial policy (see also imperialism). The latter was pursued even more energetically under crispi, a Sicilian who had once fought alongside garibaldi and who headed the government during the periods 1887-91 and 1893-6. He formalized the Italian colonization of Eritrea in 1889, before sanctioning a disastrous invasion of Ethiopia that in 1896 brought humiliating defeat at Adowa together with his own political downfall.
Crispi had also been confronted by internal unrest. During his second ministry he ruthlessly repressed peasant discontent in Sicily, and introduced laws obstructing the rise of socialism and ANARCHISM. These developments reflected the fact that by the 1890s the poverty-stricken landless laborers of the south were engaged in massive MIGRATION, not only towards a northern Italy at last experiencing rapid industrialization but also towards the USA. One symptom of turmoil was the anarchist assassination in 1900 of Umberto I, who had ruled since 1878 and was now succeeded by VICTOR EMMANUEL III. The early years of the new century witnessed the ascendancy of giolitti, an essentially pragmatic liberal reformist. He used the techniques of trasformismo to integrate the socialists into the political system by promoting schemes ofWELFARISM and by introducing, in 1911, almost universal male franchise. nationalism too was part of his armory, as evident in the popular acclaim that accompanied his launching of the ITALO-TURKISH WAR of 1911-12, which secured the colonization of Libya. Having won the 1913 elections at the head of the Liberals, Giolitti stood down from the premiership early the following year. Nonetheless, when world war i broke out, his was one of the most influential voices that emphasized Italy’s military unpreparedness and helped to secure initial neutrality. He maintained this stance even when in May 1915 his successor, Antonio Salandra, brought the country into the conflict against Austria - and thus not as part of the Triple Alliance, but as the ally of Britain, France, and Russia. This realignment followed the secret London treaty concluded in April, whereby those three powers had promised to satisfy the remaining claims of Italian irredentism by stripping the habsburg empire of Trentino, the South Tyrol, central Dalmatia, and the city-port of TRIESTE. Having declared war on Germany too in 1916, Italy had a hard struggle against the CENTRAL POWERS which included most notably her major defeat at caporetto in October-November 1917. However, by the summer and early autumn of 1918 her forces had recovered to win battles on the Piave and finally at Vittorio Veneto.
As victors, the Italian delegates to the 1919 paris PEACE SETTLEMENT, headed by orlando, hoped to obtain even more than the London Treaty had offered, especially with regard to FIUME. In the event, once the st germain treaty had left unimplemented the previous promises about Dalmatia, they emerged with rather less. Though their other gains from Austria were far from insubstantial, Italians protested against a “mutilated” victory. It took a raid by d’annunzio’s irregulars, conducted in September 1919, to provoke a revision of the Fiume issue. Even so, that dramatic eruption was itself a sign of the lawlessness now threatening to overtake Italy. The years 1918-20 would become known as the biennio rosso, when discontent with domestic as well as diplomatic policies appeared to be playing into the hands of the Left, and particularly of “Reds” inspired by the bolshevik triumph in the Russian revolutions of 1917. Against this background - of inflation, hunger, strikes, and unemployment, particularly as experienced by large numbers of demobilized and disillusioned soldiers - the ex-socialist Mussolini and his new Fascist movement emerged as the proponents of a nationalist and anti-communist cause that offered the restoration of order and of pride in italianita. In late October 1922, with the support of many military, ecclesiastical, and business leaders, the king offered him the premiership, under circumstances where the Fascists’ much-vaunted march on rome became essentially the first celebration of a takeover already achieved.
What rapidly developed into the dictatorship of Mussolini (discussed elsewhere in connection with his own career) lasted for more than twenty years. It included a rejection of parliamentary authority, as well as some degree ofreconciliation with the papacy through the lateran treaties of 1929. Important manifestations of the Duce’s nationalistic foreign policy were his successful ITALO-ETHIOPIAN WAR of 1935-6 (a revenge for Adowa) and his annexation of Albania early in 1939. After hitler attained control over Germany in 1933, the Duce tended to be at first suspicious and then patronizing towards this newer fascist dictator. But it soon became plain that Italy was the junior partner in their Berlin-Rome axis. Though both leaders joined in supporting franco’s Nationalists during the Spanish civil war, Mussolini declined to be drawn into the opening phase of world war ii. Having not entered the fray until May 1940, the Italian forces then became increasingly reliant on German support as their own campaigns in Greece and North Africa faltered. In July 1943 Allied troops landed in Sicily, and within a fortnight the Fascist Grand Council and the king had combined to secure Mussolini’s dismissal and arrest. He was initially replaced by Marshal badoglio, who obtained an armistice in September before formally declaring war on Germany in October. Over the next eighteen months much of mainland Italy was torn apart as Hitler’s troops sought to maintain their hold on it in the face of Allied advances from the south and of sabotage by the Italian resistance movement. Though the Nazis managed to rescue Mussolini and gave him charge of the puppet-regime known as the SAL(O republic, it was the partisans who ultimately triumphed by executing him in April 1945.
This time Italy experienced not mutilated victory but a mitigated defeat. There was no soviet involvement in her occupation, and she escaped the partitioning that befell Germany. The 1947 PARIS TREATY required the Italians to relinquish all African colonial claims, but permitted them to keep the south Tyrol while sustaining only moderate losses of territory in the Adriatic and the Dodecanese. By then, a plebiscite (in which women voted for the first time) had replaced the monarchy with a republic, and the western Allies were concentrating on swiftly re-establishing Italy as a source of parliamentary-democratic support within the new cold war context. In the early postwar years they placed particular reliance on de GASPERI, who headed a new movement of Christian DEMOCRACY. This grouping benefited from the divisions between its socialist and communist rivals, and remained until the early 1990s an essential part of the successive coalition realignments to which the country seemed fated. Under the De Gasperi premiership (1945-53) Italy gained materially from the marshall plan and became a founding member both of nato and of the so-called six who were exploring a path towards European integration. The political system was strengthened during the 1960s by the willingness of the Christian Democratic leader MORO to pursue an “opening to the left” that brought the socialists into the sequence of coalitions. Though the south remained relatively poor and still suffered badly from the organized criminality of the Mafia, much of the country enjoyed a period of prosperity, with such firms as Fiat, Olivetti, Zanussi, and Pirelli flourishing in international trade. From the late 1960s, however, Italy entered into the anni di piombo - the years of leaden bullets - when economic progress faltered and there was a renewal of extra-parliamentary TERRORISM, exemplified by the red brigades and their 1978 assassination of Moro. Such leftist extremism was also partly a protest against the attempts made by the moderate Communist leader berlinguer, whose party had been excluded from coalitions since 1947, to secure an “historic compromise” with the Christian Democrats (see also Eurocommunism).
Some greater measure of stability was restored during the 1980s, most notably under craxi who from 1983 to 1987 served as Italy’s first Socialist leader. Yet, by the early 1990s, even this accomplished wheeler-dealer had been successfully charged with forms of bribery and corruption that were increasingly revealed as pervading most of the political class. In the course of 1992-3 Italians witnessed an extraordinary drama of factional party collapse that affected the Christian Democrats, the Socialists, and the Communists alike. The main beneficiary was berlusconi, a business magnate who already controlled an extensive communications empire. In the 1994 elections he headed a new movement called Forza Italia. This propelled him briefly into his first premiership, with support from smaller rightwing elements (including an emergent devolu-tionist, or even separatist, Northern League that regarded the mezzogiorno essentially as a drain on the resources of more dynamic regions such as Veneto, Lombardy, and Piedmont). From 1996 to 2001 it was the centre-left, with Romano Prodi as its pivotal figure, which held the upper hand. However, Berlusconi then regained power to become the dominant Italian politician of the first decade of the new century. He served as prime minister from 2001 to 2006, and again from 2008 as leader of a party recently reorganized as Il Popolo della Liberta. In his pursuit of a broadly conservative free-market agenda for a country now inhabited by some 60 million, Berlusconi’s demagogic talents, coupled with dominance of a propaganda empire, were clearly useful assets. Yet he showed little inclination towards using such advantages to promote long-overdue structural reform. It also became increasingly doubtful whether they would be sufficient to protect him from a rising tide of allegations involving personal scandal, as well as charges of corrupt political practices of a kind all too familiar in the history of the Italian Republic.
Izvolsky, Alexander Petrovich, Count (18561919), Russian diplomat and Foreign Minister (1906-10). Following the Russian revolution of 1905, Izvolsky’s chief objective was to reduce Russia’s entanglements in external affairs so as to leave space for domestic reform. Having successfully defused difficulties with Britain over Persia, Afghanistan, and Tibet, he negotiated the ANGLO - RUSSIAN ENTENTE (1907) which formed part of the TRIPLE ENTENTE that also included France. However, his diplomacy in the BALKANS was more confused. Although he reluctantly acceded to Austria’s project of formally annexing bosnia-
HERZEGOVINA (1908), his Viennese counterpart AEHRENTHAL then failed to reciprocate over Russian claims upon maritime access through the DARDANELLES. This led to increased tension in the period prior to world war i. Izvolsky served as ambassador in Paris from 1910 to 1916, and after the RUSSIAN REVOLUTIONS OF 1917 he remained in France until his death at Biarritz.
Jacobins Members of the Jacobin clubs that were at the forefront of radical extra-parliamentary action during the french revolution of 1789. The first and most significant of these was at Paris. It grew out of the Breton Club of 1789, so-called because its founders came from Brittany. As membership expanded, its name was changed to the Society of the Friends of the Constitution, popularly known as the “Jacobins” after its meeting place, a nationalized Dominican monastery in the rue Saint-Honore. It was distinguished from the many other clubs founded at the start of the Revolution both by taking a common line on business to be transacted in the Assemblies, thus permitting the Jacobins to operate as a peculiarly effective pressure group, and by forming a network of affiliated societies that gave it a national presence. At their height in 1793, there were some 2,000 provincial clubs with a membership of 100,000. Unlike the cordeliers, the Jacobins charged high admission fees and an annual subscription that restricted membership to the affluent middle classes in the earlier years. However, from October 1792 the public were admitted to the galleries of the Paris club, allowing the Jacobins to maintain contact with working-class sentiment andtobolstertheir claimsto probity and openness. Their clubs became seed-beds for rising politicians. Until 1791, the liberal constitutional monarchists, headed by the triumvirate of Barnave, Lameth, and Duport, represented the dominant strand of opinion within the Jacobins. But
LOUIS XVi’s flight to VARENNES split them. The constitutional monarchists in the Paris club defected to form the Feuillants, though they were not followed by members of the provincial societies. The radical rump that remained in the Paris club re-formed, initially under the leadership of brissot and the girondins, but became increasingly challenged by ROBESPIERRE and his adherents, especially over the issue of war (see french revolutionary wars). From September 1792, the Jacobin faction of around 100 deputies in the convention dominated the politics of the Assembly, though they became increasingly dependent upon support from the sans-culottes. The provincial Jacobins were prominent in implementing the terror and dechristianization[2], in close liaison with the representatives-on-mission. Though the Jacobin club at Paris survived in the immediate aftermath of Robespierre’s downfall, it was closed in November 1794. The provincial societies went the same way the following August, amid the reaction that followed the events of thermidor. Many Jacobins fell victim to the white terror that ensued. Theirs was an ambiguous political legacy. For some contemporaries, Jacobinism embodied the dangers inherent in a centralized and bloody dictatorship; for others, it represented the best hope of social progress.
Jaruzelski, Wojciech (1923-), First Secretary of the Communist Party of Poland (1981-9), and Head of State (1985-90) with title of President
The Wiley-Blackwell Dictionary of Modern European History Since 1789 Nicholas Atkin, Michael Biddiss and Frank Tallett
© 2011 Nicholas Atkin, Michael Biddiss, Frank Tallett. ISBN: 978-1-405-18922-4
(1989-90). Having been deported in childhood to the Soviet Union, he fought in the Polish division of the RED ARMY during World War II. After his return to Poland, he continued to pursue a military career and joined the Communist Party (see communism) in 1947. He was chief of general staff from 1965 to 1968, and then minister of defense until 1983. In 1981 he had also assumed the premiership, with a view to quelling the disorder that had continued after the collapse of gierek’s administration. Possibly anxious to forestall any danger of Soviet intervention, Jaruzelski soon resorted to martial law. This prevailed for two years, during which time he imprisoned many dissidents, including wale;sa and other figures prominent in the new trade-union movement of SOLIDARITY. As opposition continued to grow through the mid-1980s, the Polish regime adopted a more conciliatory stance that also reflected its heed for some of the reformist urgings coming from gorbachev in Moscow. Once the European revolutions of 1989-91 were under way, Jaruzelski managed a more dignified retreat from power than most ofhis fellow-leaders across the communist bloc. In 1996 the Polish parliament agreed not to prosecute him on charges concerning the repression inflicted under martial law during the period 1981-3.
Jaures, Jean Leon (1859-1914), French socialist leader and intellectual. Born to middle-class parents in Castres, he enjoyed a glittering academic career and became a philosophy lecturer at the university of Toulouse. In 1885 he entered parliament as the republican “Opportunist” deputy for the Tarn, and was a supporter of ferry’s colonial ventures. When Jaurees lost his seat in 1889, he returned to academic life and became an advocate of socialism. He re-entered parliament in 1893 as an independent socialist deputy for Albi. Never an ideologue, he felt uncomfortable with the Marxism (see marx) espoused by guesde, and favored gradualist reform. Without compromising his ideals, he believed that socialists should work to change the system from within, and alongside millerand he urged cooperation with bourgeois parties. Jaurees was an ardent defender of dreyfus, and in 1904 he founded the newspaper L’Humanit'e. A year later he set aside his differences with Guesde in order to found a united socialist party, the Section
Francaise de l’Internationale Ouvriere. On the eve of World War I this had 100 seats in parliament, yet it never matched the success of the SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF GERMANY and remained beset by factional differences. Increasingly agitated by the worsening international situation, Jaurees advocated pacifism and a general strike to avert conflict. On July 31, 1914, with war imminent, he was assassinated by a right-wing nationalist.
Jelacic, Josip (1801-59), Croatian soldier and supporter of the illyrian movement who assisted the HABSBURG EMPIRE in its suppression of the REVOLUTIONS OF 1848-9. Soon after these began, he found himself in March 1848 being nominated as ban (governor) of Croatia both by the imperial state council and by the Zagreb revolutionary assembly. In this capacity, he promoted popular reforms, including the abolition of serfdom, the calling of elections, and the ending of Croatian subordination to Hungary. The imperial court disliked much of his approach and tried to have him removed, before conceding that he might offer vital help in crushing a still more dangerous Magyar revolt. Thus in September 1848 Jelacic led an imperial army of 40,000 against the Hungarians, but was soon driven back almost to vienna. There during October he joined windischgrAtz in bombarding the Austrian radicals who had just launched a mass rising. He then returned to the campaign against the Magyar rebellion - a task of suppression that was not completed until August 1849, and only with additional Russian assistance. He remained ban of Croatia until his death, loyally serving the new Habsburg emperor, FRANCIS JOSEPH I. However, the latter proved unresponsive to Jelacic’s hopes for a federalist reorganization of the imperial structures (see federalism)!]), conducted on principles more respectful towards the rights of the Croats and of their fellow-Slavs.
Jena-Auerstadt, Battles of Major engagements fought on October 14,1806 during the Napoleonic WARS in which the Prussians were decisively defeated. Alarmed by the formation of the confederation OF THE RHINE following Austria’s defeat at AUSTERLITZ (1805), Prussia declared war on France in August 1806. Prussian forces, beset by divided leadership, advanced hesitantly. At Jena in Saxony
NAPOLEON I engaged them, ordering Davout and BERNADOTTE to move north and cut off their line of retreat. But while Napoleon rapidly overwhelmed his opponents, Davout unexpectedly encountered the main Prussian force some 19 kilometers (12 miles) to the north at Auerstadt. Although outnumbered by more than two to one, the French fought a skilful defensive battle until FREDERICK WILLIAM III, commanding the Prussian forces, ordered a retreat. Bernadotte took no part in the battle, and was fortunate to escape court-martial. This particular campaign, which ended in July 1807 with the tilsit treaty, prompted far-reaching reforms in Prussia (see GNEISENAU; hardenberg; scharnhorst; stein).
Jenkins, Roy (1920-2003), British centrist politician, particularly active in promoting European
INTEGRATION (see also BRITAIN AND EUROPE). This
University-educated miner’s son became a Labour MP in 1948. His precocious talents were recognized by Harold Wilson, who made him aviation minister in 1964 and promoted him to Home secretary the following year. In that role Jenkins lent support to private members’ bills decriminalizing homosexuality and legalizing abortion. In1967hetook charge of the Treasury, overseeing a devaluation of the pound and helping to stem a balance-of-payments crisis. After Labour’s defeat in the 1970 elections, Jenkins (now deputy leader of the party) took an increasing interest in Europe. In 1971, he led 68 pro-European Labour MPs to support the Conservative government’s policy of gaining British entry into the European Community. Three years later, Jenkins returned as Home Secretary and led the “yes” campaign in favor of continuing the nation’s membership. Though increasingly mistrusted by his own party, he seemed a natural choice as president of the European Commission, and during his term in Brussels (1977-81) he laid the foundations of the European monetary system and reaffirmed the powers of the Commission which had been whittled away by de gaulle. It is widely acknowledged that the delors reforms of the 1980s greatly benefited from the groundwork laid by Jenkins. Returning to the UK in 1981, he was disenchanted with the extremism then gripping Labour and therefore helped to found a new social Democratic movement that aimed to break the mold of British two-party politics. In 1982 he resumed his career as an MP, but was soon disappointed by his new party’s inability to maintain its initial momentum. Having lost his Commons seat in 1987, he entered the House of Lords. From there he continued to promote the centrist and proEuropean views that also became increasingly important to the “New” Labour project pursued under blair.
Jews Those who profess belief in Judaism, or who otherwise in a more secular sense identify themselves with much of the tradition of community and culture that originated among the ancient Hebrews. The experience of the Jewish people in modern Europe is remarkable for the prominence both of its negative and of its positive features. While the former are most apparent in the prejudice and persecution that Jews have suffered at the hands of others and are best considered chiefly within the context of antisemitism, the latter involve acknowledging major Jewish contributions to European political, economic, and cultural life over the last two centuries or so. The achievements in science, philosophy, education, and the creative arts (as registered, for example, by Freud and Kafka as part of modernism in culture) have been particularly outstanding, and so too has been the role played in financial and BANKING services - a sphere where firms such as Rothschilds were able to establish themselves within parts of the market that the Christian community had tended to under-occupy. The scale of Jewish accomplishment appears all the more remarkable granted the demographic base involved: though the numbers are particularly hard to calculate, their relative slenderness is plain enough. Around 1820 the tally of European Jews may well have stood at some 2.7 million - now predominantly the Yiddish-speaking Ashkenazim of the continent’s central and eastern regions (see also PALE OF settlement) rather than the Sephardim of the Mediterranean area. By 1900 the figure had risen to around 9 million, thus comprising 80 percent of the world’s Jewish population. A hundred years or so later, however, the total had fallen back to an estimated 2.3 million, divided almost equally between western Europe on one hand and central and eastern Europe (including the former soviet union) on the other. From the end of the nineteenth century onward the major concentrations of Jewish settlement were becoming increasingly located in the USA, and eventually in Palestine/Israel (see also Zionism) as well. Much of that MIGRATION was attributable to the frustrations caused by incomplete emancipation and assimilation, and especially to a rising tide of antisemitism. That hostility was also responsible, however, for an essentially murderous process aimed in the early 1940s at the genocidal elimination ofthose who remained within Europe itself. Though hitler’s project of a “final solution” was only partially implemented, it nonetheless brought death to some 6 million of the 9 million Jews still living on the continent when world war ii began. Subsequent to that disaster, the revival in Europe of Jewish communities was complicated by further major emigration from Russia to Israel, by the divisions (broadly, between Orthodox and Reform traditions of allegiance) that persisted within Judaism itself, and more generally by the increasing pressures towards secularization evident in a wider society strongly marked by “post-Christian” values. There have also been tensions with Islam, related to recent rapid growth in the numbers of European Muslims and to continuing spillover from the troubled politics of the Middle East.
Joffre, Joseph (1852-1931), French general of WORLD WAR I. He was credited with the “miracle of the MARNE,” which reversed the German offensive of September 1914. A professional soldier, he served in the defense of Paris in 1870 and then earned distinction in the colonial service, one of the best avenues of promotion during a prolonged spell of European peace. Chief of the general staff in 1911, he helped devise the infamous Plan 17 which envisaged an offensive strategy in any new war with Germany. The dangers of this approach were demonstrated by early German successes in 1914, but Joffre possessed considerable calmness and was able to repulse the invader at the Marne. In 1915 he planned offensives in Artois and Champagne, yet neither attack made much ground and both resulted in heavy casualties. With the failure of the somme offensive in 1916, criticism of Joffre became uncontainable. His appointment as marshal was effectively a “move upstairs,” and allowed nivelle to become commander-in-chief. Joffre retired from public life in 1918, but retained the affection of the French people who nicknamed him “Papa Joffre.”
JohnXXIII (1881-1963), Pope (1958-63). Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli, the son of Italian peasant farmers, came to prominence after 1925 for his service as a papal diplomat in Bulgaria, Greece, and Turkey. During World War II he was also notable for his efforts to help Jews and deportees in Greece and to assist the church in France under the VICHY REGIME - endeavors that displayed the warmth, tolerance, and human understanding that were his hallmarks. Already in his later seventies when elected pope, he was widely expected to be a caretaker. Yet his pontificate was a turning point for Catholicism, mainly because of his summoning of the Second Vatican council held in 1962-3. This was conceived as the start ofa process of updating, or aggiornamento, that would regenerate every aspect of church life and lead to greater christian unity. He died before the completion of its formal proceedings. One of the most loved popes, he was beatified by john paul ii in 2000.
John Paul II (1920-2005), Pope (1978-2005). Following the deaths of Paul VI and John Paul I in the autumn of 1978, the second papal conclave of that year elected the Polish-born Karol Wojtyla. Thus, as John Paul II, the new leader of CATHOLICISM assumed an office that had been entirely monopolized by Italians since the early sixteenth century. A native of Wadowice, the young Wojtyla had become a seminarian during World War II. After ordination in 1946 he progressed to a professorship of theology at Lublin. Appointed a suffragan bishop in 1958, he then participated in the Second Vatican council of 1962-3. At the end of this he succeeded to the archbishopric of Krakow, and in 1967 was raised to the rank of cardinal. During the first half of his papal tenure, he still possessed a physical vigor unmatched by any other modern Bishop ofRome. This was amply evident in his pastoral determination to undertake European and indeed worldwide travel on an unprecedented scale. With an increasingly charismatic reputation, he reached out to adherents of orthodox Christianity and also of the major non-Christian religions (e. g. deploring more convincingly than any of his predecessors the Catholic contribution to centuries of antisemitism). However, notwithstanding these initiatives as well as his earlier work for the Vatican Council, he also showed himself increasingly inclined towards slowing the pace of further theological and institutional reform within his own church. Thus, he proved notably supportive of the reactionary cult of opus dei, while also opposing campaigns in favor of women’s ordination and artificial birth control. Much ofhis approach to European political issues reflected a similar conservatism. However, granted the circumstances still prevailing particularly in the central and eastern regions of the continent during the 1980s, it was understandable that such an attitude should be expressed in the paradoxical form of demands for radical change. He directed these principally against the post-1945 hegemony of Soviet-inspired communism. His return visits to Poland (in 1979, 1983, and 1987) were especially important in re-asserting the Vatican as a rival source of authority to that of the Kremlin, and in encouraging the solidarity movement to challenge the regime of jaruzelski and indeed to stimulate more general dissent across the whole of Moscow’s “satellite” system. Consequently, John Paul made a significant contribution to the causation of the revolutions of 1989-91 across communist Europe. Although he had recovered quite strongly from a nearly-fatal assassination attempt made against him in 1981, his final years as pope were marked by such severely failing health that there was growing (but unheeded) pressure for abdication. upon his death he was followed by a German who, as Benedict XVI, proved keen to accelerate a process aimed at achieving the earliest possible canonization of the first non-Italian pope of modern times.
Juan Carlos I (1938-), King of spain (1975-). Grandson of alfonso xiii, he oversaw the transition to liberal democracy following the death of FRANCO. When the latter had sought a successor, he settled on Juan Carlos ahead of his father, Don Juan, as he believed that the younger man was more malleable and could be trusted to perpetuate his reactionary regime. To this end, Juan Carlos was designated Prince of Spain in 1969. In the event, he was his own man, meeting privately with opposition leaders who sought a return to democracy. In 1974, with Franco’s health rapidly failing, he became acting head ofstate, and on the dictator’s death in 1975 was proclaimed king. He quickly pressed ahead with liberal reforms and received the blessing of both the socialist and Communist parties that was crucial for ensuring the legitimacy of the new state. In 1977 Spain held its first democratic elections since the second REPUBLIC, and the following year approved a constitution in which Juan Carlos relinquished most of the powers previously available to Franco. None of this pleased sections of the military, who launched an abortive coup in 1981. Juan Carlos publicly denounced the plotters and won enormous acclaim, though it has been subsequently suggested that the scheme was an establishment ploy to boost the monarchy’s popularity and stymie any real opposition. Thereafter Juan Carlos rarely entered the political arena, acting instead as a figurehead crucial to preserving national unity. (See also carlism)
Julycrisis The frenetic diplomatic maneuvering which followed the assassination of Archduke
FRANCIS FERDINAND, heir to the HABSBURG EMPIRE, in
Sarajevo on June 28, 1914. Thus the crisis is pivotal to the immediate (as distinct from longer-term) causation of world war i. The full gravity ofthe situation began to become apparent only on July 23. It was then that Austria-Hungary, secretly assured of German backing, issued an ultimatum to Serbia. Aiming to suppress separatism within the Balkans and to safeguard the integrity of its empire, Vienna demanded that the Serbs should prohibit anti-Austrian propaganda, disband the nationalist movement of so-called “People’s Defense,” arrest those suspected of the assassination, allow Habsburg officials to participate in the investigation, and restrict crossborder freedom of movement. Though the Belgrade government replied within the 48-hour deadline, it was not prepared to cave in, possibly because it feared being associated with the murder plot and was seeking Russian support. The latter came on the 25th when the Tsar approved preparations for mobilization. That same day Austria-Hungary broke off diplomatic relations with serbia. While Belgrade’s reply had been conciliatory, it had not unconditionally accepted all of Vienna’s demands. This provided the pretext for an Austrian declaration of war on serbia (July 28), endorsed from Berlin. By now diplomatic panic was rising, with Britain and France both realizing that they too were being drawn directly into a crisis where military rather than civilian officials increasingly held the determining hand. On July 30 the tsar ordered general mobilization, and Germany followed suit. On August 1, Berlin declared war on Russia, claiming self-defense. Bearing in mind the franco-russian alliance, the Germans made a similar declaration against France (August 3) and thus implemented their schlieffen plan. This entailed a violation of the NEUTRALITY of Belgium, which made it easier for the British parliament to approve entry into the fray against Germany on the 4th. Two days later Vienna came into the conflict against Russia, and Serbia declared war on Germany. On August 12, France and Britain acted similarly against Austria. Despite the terms of the triple alliance Italy stayed neutral until May 1915, when it joined with France, Britain, and Russia (initially only against Austria) and not with the central powers. By then, most of Europe had become involved, and the horrors of battle were fully evident. it remains doubtful whether, back in July-August 1914, the protagonists understood the scale of what they were unleashing. Yet, because of the immense consequences stemming from their handling of that crisis, few other historical topics have been investigated in such detail or have continued to generate so much controversy.
July Days (see under Russian revolutions of 1917)
July Monarchy (1830-1848). Name given to the rule ofLouis philippe in France, after the events in July 1830 (see revolutions of 1830-2) which led to his proclamation as king. The abdication of his predecessor, charles x, had resulted from widespread discontent with that monarch’s ultraroyalist policies and in particular his contempt for the constitution. Louis Philippe (Duke of Orleans and Charles’s cousin) was seen as a safe representative of bourgeois values, and became king after accepting a revised constitutional charter that kept effective power in the hands of the wealthy. His regime was characterized by a cautious foreign and domestic policy. Both the king and GUIZOT, who as foreign minister dominated the government from 1840, refused to meet demands for extension of the franchise to the lower middle class. However, this intransigence provoked a political campaign which got out of hand early in 1848 when an economic depression brought students and workers on to the streets of Paris (see revolutions of 1848-9). Unwilling to shed blood, and mindful of the eventual fate of LOUIS XVI, Louis Philippe abdicated and moved to England where he died in 1850. (See also legitimism; orleanism)
July plot The most important conspiracy undertaken by German opponents of Nazi rule (see NAZISM). It was plotted largely by conservative senior officers deeply critical of hitler’s mishandling of WORLD WAR II, and culminated, on July 20, 1944, in a failed attempt to kill him. The chosen assassin was claus von stauffenberg who, as chief of general staff in the reserve army, had access to military headquarters at Rastenberg in East Prussia (the “wolf’s lair” of the Fuhrer). Having left a time-bomb under the conference table, stauffen-berg immediately flew to Berlin to join General Ludwig Beck in forming a new government that would attempt to secure a negotiated peace with the Western powers. Meanwhile, Hitler (though badly shaken) had survived the explosion. stauf-fenberg was promptly shot, as was Beck after a bungled attempt to kill himself. Among others associated with the plot, rommel was the most notable figure to succeed in resort to suicide, though his betrayal of the regime and his manner of death were kept secret. Many of Stauffenberg’s co-conspirators shared his fate of summary execution, or were otherwise dispatched only after suffering the crude travesties of due process that characterized the “People’s Court” of judge Roland Freisler.
JulyRevolution (see under july monarchy; revolutions OF 1830-2)
June Days A protest between June 22 and 26, 1848, by the workers of Paris, whose suppression by General cavaignac undermined the radicalism of the French second republic. One of the earliest problems confronting the Revolutionary government, which had succeeded the july monarchy in February 1848 (see revolutions of 1848-9), was large-scale unemployment. A cure was attempted through the establishment of government workshops in urban centers. There were 120,000 of these by the start of June. Moderate and conservative elements within government were anxious about their cost, and also troubled by the
Increasing radicalism of the Parisian working class that was demonstrated in street protests on May 15. So it was that, on June 21, orders were given to close the workshops. Despite providing only limited employment and offering little more than a miserly dole, they had at least provided a safety net and were valued by the left as a form of social organization. Their closure on June 22 was thus met by the raising of barricades in Paris, a protest supported by some 60,000 people, though not imitated in the provinces. when some members of the Parisian National Guard sided with the protestors, cavaignac as minister for war initially bided his time. However, on the 24th he ordered in his men, who, ironically, were recruited from the same social classes as the demonstrators. in the ensuing fighting, some 4,000 government troops and 6,000 insurgents were killed. Afterwards many protesters were summarily executed, and at least 5,000 were transported. Frightened by what had happened, the Constituent Assembly subsequently voted full powers to Cavaignac and, in November, settled on a conservative constitution. in the presidential elections conducted the following month, not even Cavaignac’s tough reputation could save him from overwhelming defeat byLouis Napoleon Bonaparte (later napoleon iii) whose own law-and-order message was far better received, especially by the peasantry.
Junkers Literally “young lords,” these were landed nobles concentrated in Prussia and eastern Germany. Enjoying a virtual monopoly of senior ranks in the Prussian army and civil service, the Junkers were politically conservative. They were alive, however, to technological advances and during the nineteenth century did much to modernize their extensive East Elbian estates and to promote a market economy. They were les
World History
