into the question probe. >> the electoral college with the vote on the presidential election looking at challenges facing the electoral college and potential reform. we talk to the manager of election reform at the heritage foundation and brooklyn law school assistant professor of law. find c-span's the weekly wherever you get your podcast. >> thank you, welcome to our book talk with david nassau, author of the new book "the last million: europe's displaced persons from world war to cold war," europe's displaced persons from world war -- "the last million: europe's displaced persons from world war to cold war". i am joel rosenthal with ethics and international affairs. those of us in the carnegie

family institutions have a special affection for david nasaw. 's biography of andrew carnegie was a life-changing event for us. through david's work, we came to know andrew carnegie, one lesson from the book stayed with me and animated my work, and that is the cockeyed optimism was not entirely misplaced. for all the madness you see in the world progress based on reason and can do spirit is indeed possible. the idea keeps me going and this occasion gives me the opportunity to say thank you. in addition to the carnegie biography david's previous books include biographies of joseph kennedy and william

randolph hearst. today we turn to david nasaw's supportive not one person but 1 million persons who emerged brutalized yet alive on the day, april 1945. "the last million: europe's displaced persons from world war to cold war" is an epic story the texas to the heart of europe during and after world war ii. it describes the movement of millions of people amid shifting borders and general chaos. about war and its aftermath. it describes life at a discreet level in the highest reaches of government. millions of people were displaced by world war ii, most known were those sent to concentration camps but also migrant laborers, political prisoners and pows. when the war ended many if not most displaced persons returned home yet as the title suggests

1 million did not. this book tells the story of their search for a new home. thanks for joining us. a simple question, how did you come to this story, how do you see the last million as a singular story to be told? >> it had to do with tony just's extraordinary book postwar. i had learned not to take the common sense view of historical events as necessarily truthful. sometimes only partially truthful. the book began clear to me, much clearer than before that wars don't end, with peace

treaties, cessation of hostility even with soldiers going home. into postwar, the suffering for civilians displaced by war continues unabated in the cases of the last million, 3 to 5 years that they remained in germany, in camps, many behind barbed wire. after ve day. >> host: let's talk about the million who remain. you talk about the 1 million into germany. can you give us a little bit of information about who these people were and who wins willingly and who didn't?

>> there were three streams into germany during the war. the most important was in the ukraine. these were in large part adolescents, young men and women grabbed from their homes, forced onto trucks and trains into germany. hitler and the third reich leadership knew the only possible way to send millions of soldiers to the eastern front was to replace them with millions more from the east. that was the first group. they began arriving in 1940-41 and continued to arrive through the end of the war. the second stream that made up the last million came in 1944-1945 from lithuania,

estonia, and parts of ukraine and these were men, women and children, men and women who had in one way or another collaborated with the nazi authorities. sometimes that collaboration meant a post office overseen by a nazi official. in other cases it meant serving in the auxiliary police and rounding up jews. in some it meant joining the ss. when it became clear that the red army was on its march and would soon arrive in the baltic states and in the ukraine thousands upon thousands of citizens who collaborated in some way, citizens who could not abide the thought of living under soviet domination made their way into germany but the

third group for the jewish -- as the war came to a end hitler and the germans officials realized they didn't want the fact of the death camps to be discovered by the russians and the world, number one. number 2, they needed more labor at home. and the decision was made to relocate those who had survived the death camps and the labor camps in poland and the balkans to relocate them, death march them into germany where they would be not gassed, but worked to death. most of them in underground armament factories these were

the three groups, germany, journey into germany is different. so too would be there experiences in germany. >> if the day or a little bit after were in 1945, could you give us a little bit of a feel for what it is like in these camps and what sort of futures score choices are these people looking at? >> there is no way to comprehend the devastation in germany that displaced persons found when they left workplaces or concentration camps, they were rounded up by the allies, gotten out of the way, and then sorted out by nationality and taken into camps behind barbed wire often. camps that were run by united

nations relief and rehabilitation administration but supplied by the armies, food, medical supplies, shelter, they built facilities and took care of them. in germany, in the years following ve day in these camps, there were little ukraines, little latvias, little jewish centers. in the beginning the unrest and the allies decided they were going to separate out by nationality. they did not recognize there was such a thing as a jew. lithuanian jews were sequestered with lithuanians,

polish jews with non-jewish poles. in many instances the jewish survivors found themselves in the same camps as those who had been there guards in concentration and labor camps. that ended in july and august when the jews were put in their own camps. there is a sense in all these camps that this was transitional, that they would soon be allowed to go home. the latvians, the estonians believed world war iii was coming rapidly and the americans and british were going to invigorate ukraine, latvia, estonia, lithuania from the soviets, misplaced persons could go home again. same with the polls, the jews believed they could never go home again, they had no place in europe with some of the buddhists trying in the beginning to convince themselves and others they

could return and build a new jewish community. the only place on earth they soon recognized they would be welcome in palestine, the british did everything they possibly could under the mandate to keep the jews out. >> host: i want to talk about who couldn't go home. s1 point the decision is made to not force repatriation, that individuals would have a choice. talk about that. >> guest: one of the things i realized as i did my research is the cold war begins almost immediately. the ramp from world war ii cold war is a steep one.

in the beginning the soviets and their allies in eastern europe, soviet dominated land of eastern europe, they demand every displaced person except the jews and those who were displaced years before every displaced person should go home, but one or 2 or not they had to go home. the allies said no. the americans and british said no. people have the right to choose their own citizenship whether they wanted to go home or not. the soviets, there is a paranoia that has some basis in reality, after world war i the allies tried to overthrow the bolshevik regime. some of stalin's compatriots

believed that was a real possibility after world war ii and what the allies were doing, what the british and americans were doing was creating an army of anti-soviet, anti-communist dissidents that would be available to spread anti-soviet propaganda and or world war iii. >> host: you mentioned in passing the establishment of international institutions to deal with this problem. first we have the united nations relief and rehabilitation authority and then later we have the ir oh, international refugee organization and there is amazing passage in your book, those who will look at it on page 258, where you talk a little bit about how these

organizations and their names hint at a mission of being humane institutions to provide relief for human suffering and yet they turn into something else, utilitarian employment agencies if you will. talk a little bit about those institutions and how they are set up and where they eventually go. >> guest: franklin roosevelt in this book and others, he understands in 1943 that there will be an enormous refugee problem not only in europe but asia as well and the only way to solve the refugee problem is through international cooperation and he is instrumental in 1943 in the rehabilitation administration and it's the nations of the

world including the soviet union to join. the understanding is that it will be an agency that repatriate's, that takes care of the immediate needs of the refugees and provides passage home for them. for the last million that doesn't happen and although the soviets demand they be sent home or made to survive on their own in germany the americans and the british continue to support these people in camps for a year, a year and a half until it becomes clear they are not going home. the americans and the british spearhead the new organization, new organization without the soviets was the soviets won't

join. it is not to repatriate but to resettle and beginning in 1946-47 there is this extraordinary, bizarre meat market set up, a meat market set up in the displaced persons camps and all members of the international review -- review organization, dozens of latin american nations, canada, australia, south africa, delegations into the camps to find workers to take jobs they can't find anybody else to do.

it begins with the british, the british have a severe labor shortage and they can't get anybody to work in the tuberculosis center or hospitals so what do they do? they go into the camps and recruit thousands of latvian women in the beginning and then they decide this works so well we need help in the mines, bring in latvian men, the latvians run out, go to lithuania, estonia, ukraine, the french dig minors, they need railroad workers and people who work in forestry. the international organization becomes, tries to look at that

but shots have been called, doing the recruiting. >> there is a hierarchy in terms of desirability and some of that based on race and perception or maybe it is purely to -- utilitarian function. >> guest: it is a combination. the latvians, the australian prime minister makes it clear the latvians are white, the latvians are protestant, the latvians are anti-communist, the latvians only arrived, unlike the polls or the jews,

only arrived in germany at the end of the war and were relatively healthy and have an suffered the ravages of the war, jewish survivors suffered. and it was felt they were hard workers. no country on earth wanted the jews. they didn't want the jews for a variety of reasons. they weren't reasons. a variety of myths and misconceptions. they regarded the jews as clannish, unwilling to do hard manual labor, as scoundrels, as thieves and worse yet as bolshevik sympathizers or operatives.

from 1947-1948 as latvians and ukrainians and estonians were resettled outside the camps the jews were left. the only way for the jews to get out of those camps was through illegal immigration to palestine. the british tried to stop them from italian portend bulgarian ports, found that but they couldn't do it and 20, 30 thousands displaced jews made their way to israel. once they arrived, the british grabbed them and sent them to cyprus and put them behind barbed wire but for the jews getting out of germany even to go into another set of displaced persons camps was more practical.

>> host: so many questions about the story of jewish displaced persons. i want to ask about truman as relates to this story. the way i am reading it in the narrative, willing to confront the british to say you need to open up palestine. it is a painful process but he confronted the british and gets there in that direction. he's not willing to confront, is that fair? >> guest: truman believes in the beginning the state department says don't go there and truman says i am going a, conference churchill and immediately says you've got to open up palestine for the jewish displaced persons and he

hence if you need to do that, you need to help me out here, you need their support and it is the humanitarian thing to do. this further argument is just tragic, you don't have to worry the way you did before the war. 6 million jews were killed. the european jews are not going to overwhelm palestine. we are not talking about millions. we are talking a couple hundred thousand. the british will not budge. you care this much about european jews take them into

the united states, truman knows about domestic politics, british politics or international politics. he knows he can't do that. that's not possible. the hostility of the european jews, misunderstanding what has happened to them is such congress is never going to allow this into the country. >> there was a theme in the book strung together and this goes back to the camps themselves, word gets back to truman that the situation is dire, people are suffering and he talks to eisenhower and tells him to clean it up and eisenhower goes through a tour of the camp, the jewish camp and makes the point these are

under united states, and. was that an act of humanity or was i romanticizing truman and eisenhower in light of more recent events with the treatment of displaced people in the united states? >> truman and eisenhower are the heroes in this book, flawed heroes but truman recognizes from the beginning the plight of displaced persons, and those who said clifford, he read the bible from early on and the pain, in the beginning you've got to realize what a mess, nobody knows how many jews had

survived, millions were killed but no one knew what the condition was, but there was this sense the state department had this sense that the jews have suffered but so has everybody else and we can't single out the jews, the jewish organizations in the united states and britain said jews had suffered more than any other group and they need special treatment. the state department said no, the british said absolutely not. the jews retreated like everyone else, they were treated like everyone else and the suffering was intense and in july truman sends a

fact-finding mission led by dean harrison, dean earl harrison, who was not a jew, harrison comes back with a report, and says we are treating the jews as badly as the germans did, truman reads this report to eisenhower, and says to eisenhower you got to take care of this, this is impossible, un-american, eisenhower goes to work. >> host: you mentioned before the cold war aspect of this. could you say a little more

about soviet interest in this situation, how does it look from moscow, this trip into the beginning stage of the cold war from the east? >> guest: the soviets know that large numbers of collaborators have escaped from the east, from the baltic nations, belarus, ukraine and made their way into germany. many stories of workers and collaborators who throw away their uniforms, invent new histories for themselves, finding their way into displaced persons camps and

once in displaced persons camps, they had been farmers, factory workers, the soviets know and the polls know and the yugoslavs know there are war criminals there and they want to bring them to justice, number one. number 2, they know that there is a cauldron of anti-communists in these camps and it is going to affect the future direction of europe and the war that having these dedicated, recalcitrant anti-communists let loose in the world is going to cause them hardship. the third and most important

reason is the soviets and polls the yugoslavs have been extraordinary in building nations and every labor they can including, including members of the last million who were idle in germany, rather than returning to poland to rebuild the devastated country. >> host: i don't remember when it happens but there is a bill passed in the united states congress for resettlement of refugees in the united states a couple years later. it is time but this is a big question and i'm sure everyone will feel this when reading the book, why doesn't the united states, other countries but also in the united states do

more to sort out the war criminals, collaborators, nazis and others. as they resettle in the united states. >> the americans and the british and the canadians didn't keep the war criminals and collaborators out or how to do it. i discovered that wasn't the case. in every displaced person's camp there was -- in poland the surviving jews immediately establish the historical commission. in austria the most famous of the jewish were the nazi hunters, simon wiesenthal steps up a commission, they take

testimony for displaced persons. they have lists, long lists, who among the displaced persons should be tried, no one gives a damn. one of the reasons for this is the memories of world war are obliterated by the fears of cold war. hitler has been defeated so the sentiment is in the united states, the nazis have been defeated. they are not coming back. the danger from the cold war, this notion of totalitarianism, that stalin is a latter-day hitler, the soviets are the same as the germans and we've got to turn from fighting one

more to the other almost immediately and so what if some of these displaced persons were not see collaborators or anti-soviet or fought against the red army? so what if they joined the ss? they are anti-communist and we needed them. let's forget the past and move forward. and this happens, there's a story i tell which stayed with me, a group of minors in england, that are left-wing but doesn't really matter. discovered that the latvians, displaced persons, had ss tattoos and threatened to go on strike unless something is done about it and it gets back to the government.

a labor government, what he will do is keep all of the provocative ss soldiers, in jobs where they don't have to take off their shirt. and the americans change their regular -- regulations, forming members of the ss. it is not a pretty picture and it is because this country - i don't know, congress was beset by cold war hysteria. >> i understand in the context of the time of the 1940s and early 50s there seems to be toward the end of the book a kind of a wave in the 1980s or

as time goes by 30 years later, maybe simon wiesenthal becomes more well-known but there's a wave of cases that pop up, during the reagan years, is that a function of time? i am curious how you read that. it bubbles up. >> it bubbles up in the united states. 50% of the time he is wrong, accuses people he shouldn't accuse but 50% of the time he's right. residue of nazi - nobody listens and the beginning -- in the 70s supporters and journalists, some of them who

are not jewish look again at what went on 30 years before and there begin to be leaks from ins, leaks to reporters and congresswoman elizabeth olson the news that there is in the records of the immunization and naturalization service lists not see collaborators led into the country. and because of that a couple of other congressman the question is reopened, and once the united states begins to look at what happened 30 years before, how did they get -- how many are still here?

what can we do about it? how do they begin to make the same process? regrettably it is too late even those who have a good 30 years in the united states, crime is still unpunished. >> a couple more questions for david, a question or comment by a chat function and hope to get to those toward the end of the hour. i want to avoid simple or facile comparisons but we are living in a world now, 80

million displaced people in the world. this is a live issue in a different way but i have to ask having spent all this time on this story, telling this story what does it leave you with, lessons learned or thoughts that you could connect to the situation we find ourselves in. >> let me start with the most obvious to me. in 1943 roosevelt establishes an international organization, he understands this is an international problem that requires international cooperation. until the present

administration the united states will lead in international cooperation now. having said that, the obligation of the united nations and participating nations has been not to repatriate or resettle the refugees, but to shelter and feed and supply them with medical assistance in the camps. in the 70 years since the end of the displaced persons camps in germany, the sense has been the limits of the world's responsibilities to make sure none of these people starve.

not to allow them to lead meaningful lives through repatriation or through resettlement. this is a tragedy that is only going to get worse. in my book, at the end, the only place for the displaced jews to resettle is an independent israel and i make the argument truman supports the establishment and independence of israel because he knows to establish an independent procurement the west needs as the bulwark of an anti-communist coalition, got to get the jews out of germany. it can't be west germany, 250,000 jews, the only place he

can get them, he can't get them into the united states, is israel. he supports an independent israel. where are those jews going? where did the european jews go? they are settled in rural communities, agriculture communities, houses and apartments that has been cleared of palestinians or in the case of those who had left voluntarily the israelis refused to let the palestinians returned v problem of the displaced jews is solved by the displacement of palestinians

and while i do not want to diminish the suffering of the jews who end up in israel, there displacement was five years, displacement of the palestinians is in its third generation with no signs of there ever being a resettlement. >> i will move it over to alex woodson who will tee it up for this first question. i want to make note of this theme of aftermath, the way that you conclude the book. this aftermath. to me, that suggests some idea of regeneration or growth. i don't know.

the tragedy that leads to some redemption in some way or sends off another one. before i let you go to the question do you have a sense of redemption or do you feel it repeats itself? >> let me tell two stories quickly. peter minor, his new book the holocaust tells about two misplaced persons who when they arrive in israel our sense to an apartment and as they move in they see the apartment is fully furnished as they realize it is there because the palestinians have left and they look at it and think about their suffering and they turn around and leave.

the second story is about a man named blackman and his wife's lola. he was 98. his wife was 96. they had met, had known each other and poland and got married, the two of them lost their entire families, suffered immensely in camp after camp after camp. through the kindness of their only remaining relatives in the united states they were resettled, relocated, found a home for the family, lola

raised three kids, had grandchildren came to visit them in their facility and at the end of the discussion, i look at him and i tried to ask a final question and he looks at me knowing what i am going to ask. it is a good life. he said i had a good life. he said i love my wife, mary for 70 years, i love my children and my cousins in america, finally letting me in. >> i want to make time for questions so i will turn it over to my colleague alex woodson and he will ask on behalf of those writing in, the channel line is really lighting up so over to you. >> thanks.

first question from debra rogers. can you speak about the survival spirit and how people kept hope alive? >> it is an extraordinary story and i don't want to downplayed especially in the jewish camps. .. it was their mission to resurrect a cultural nationalism to keep it alive. so the spirit in the camps was not one of defeat or

victimization but one of preparation for the next stage in their lives, which they hoped and new would follow. >> thanks. this is from david kent, kind of the personal question here my father was a jewish refugee from austria to escape to include in 38, was interned in a straight from 1940-42 and-42 and then returned to england. he came to the united states in may of 1948, came as a displaced person because of quarter for austria was too small on all refill. how could he have come as a displaced person the u.s. didn't pass the act until june? he definitely came as a displaced person. >> there was -- i have talked about in this interview. there was a treatment directive, and truman, and large part because he couldn't get the british to move, said that the

german and the austrian quotas would be enlarged, would be combined, number one. and number two, he set up offices in and around the displaced persons camps to provide visas under the quotas for those who could establish german or austrian citizenship in some way. so a small number of german and austrian jews were allowed to enter before the displaced persons act. the germans and austrians were not considered displaced persons because the displaced persons that the u.n. defined as those who had fought against the germans, the germans and the

austrians were not displaced persons, but under the treatment directive some of them were allowed to enter the country. >> okay. next question is from carnegie counsel's greedy jacobsen from massachusetts. we are often taught as children in the u.s. that the liberation of european jews from nazi germany was a major reason the allies fought in world war ii. so with the allies were not immediately concerned with injustice perpetrated on jewish people and the deep mr. thune as well, at what point do the attitude towards them change? do you think it did or this idea more of a failure of historical curriculum? >> it abundantly clear to me that the war was not fought to save the jews. there is no evidence whatsoever that it was fought to save the jews. as a matter of fact, roosevelt and his cabinet without of their

way to discount any word that american boys were being sent over to save jews. the war was fought for a variety of reasons, but the rescue of the jews was never part of that. and if that's currently in the textbooks, then that's just wrong. when the war was over, the commonsensical view is that americans open their arms, their pocketbooks to save the jews who they had not saved during the war. 6 million have died, but a quarter million remained, and the common sense view is that, i

can can we open our arms and we welcome them. that was not the case. in the end of those quarter million displaced jews, only about 50,000 came to the united states as displaced persons. some of those who went to israel because there was no place else they could go later came back, came to the united states. but the number of displaced jews who were allowed into this country was minimal compared to the need. >> this is more of a comment from phyllis lee. non-resettlement of the tenant tenet of international law said that by the unhcr, going home end quote could lead to death. there are obligations by receiving countries. some jews were forced to settle in germany, sadly. even israel didn't take it as when it first. it wasn't until 1955 that israel was willing to do so. >> yes. yes and no. israel in the very beginning,

ben-gurion said we will take all the jews, they can. israel set up an organization to bring the jews who had tuberculosis, who were sick, over infirmed to bring them to israel. there were groups, large numbers of jews who remained in germany where those who had gone to israel, found that they couldn't live there because it was in a state of war, came back to germany, and there were groups of orthodox jews who remained in germany. but for the most part the israelis accepted the jews. there are questions about whether they could have treated them better once they got the israel, and there was also some resistance to bring them into the country.

but israel did open its doors. it felt an obligation to take in as many jews as wanted to come to israel. >> this question goes back to an earlier one but more specifically it some carnegie counsel's billy pickett. are there any lessons learned from the last million and looking at the u.s. border with mexico? >> yes, yes, yes. let me start with two. one, there has to be a fact-based approach. i mean, we can't relax just as the jews were kept out because of this myth that they were bolsheviks. so all of us have to do everything we can to counter this myth of mexicans who don't want to work hard or they are

criminals, or hondurans and colombians are gang members. i mean, there has to be a fact-based realism. at the same time humanitarian interest at some point have to override geopolitical interests and political interests and political differences. we have to open our hearts and our souls and our minds to the crisis on the southern border. there is no sign that that is being done under the current administration. one would hope that it changes. >> alex, i can take it now. we're coming to the , to make sure david had a chance to sum up. david, i had a big question. we may have to have a separate conversation over lunch sometime

about -- i don't want to get into counterfactual history but i know big part of the book you were talking about how, as you were saying, the war really doesn't in end and it blends io the cold war. did you give any thought to a counterfactual about some things that could've been done differently? and maybe it feeds off the answer you just gave, but were we able to go back there in time seeing cold war on the horizon, how this problem might've been addressed in a way that would have been more positive and led to perhaps less confrontation with the soviets? >> yes, i think it would have been possible to cooperate with the soviets. and what the soviets wanted was -- the soviets had a lot of the nazi records, a lot of the

german records. the soviets also had eyewitnesses to the baltic states and ukraine to knew who the war criminals were. and if the americans had cooperated with the soviets, war criminals would have been found and brought to justice. now, the americans didn't cooperate with the soviets because we didn't trust the soviets, and we were right to. but you don't have to trust them -- we didn't have to trust them entirely to enter into some sort of cooperative relationship with them. early on. and that was not done. and as a result the soviets were convinced that we were keeping these war criminals in the camps because they were anti-communist, which was possibly true. and the hostility between the

soviets and the american coalition increased to the point where it was unmanageable. >> so we are right now at the top of the hour, so we have to adjourn this session. david, thank you very much for spending this time with us. this is one of those books where it really is another life-changing experience for me. it makes me look at the end of the war in a completely different way, so thank you so much. we will look forward to continuing the conversation in the future. >> thank you. this has been a terrific conversation. thank you very much. >> and thanks, everybody for listening. okay. we will adjourn. bye-bye. ♪ c-span's podcast the weekly looks at the electoral college with the vote in the presidential election still being counted. we look at the challenges facing the electoral college and potential reforms.

the heritage foundation and -- fine c-span's the weekly wherever you get your podcasts. >> use your mobile devices, laptop or phone pagoda c-span.org/election for easy access to election 2020 results, the balance of power in congress, our latest video live and on-demand of the transition of power. go to c-span.org/election. >> the supreme court hears oral arguments on the affordable care act and consultant cases of texas versus california and california versus texas. today at 10 a.m. eastern on c-span. the healthcare law was challenged by texas after 2017 7 republican tax law a limited the penalty for not having healthcare insurance. listen to the oral arguments

lidocaine emps dirt on c-span come on demand c-span.org/to bring court or on the c-span radio app. >> the supreme court heard oral argument in the case dealing with lgbtq discriminations and foster care agencies. the group catholic social services sued the city of philadelphia letting the free speech was being violated when the city stop referring children to them because they wouldn't place children in the care and homes of same-sex couples. the supreme court has until june of next year to issue a ruling in the case. >> the honorable the chief justice and the associate justices of the suprememe courtf the united states. all persons having business before the honorable the supreme court of the united states are admonished to pay attention for the court is now sitting. god save the united states and this honorable court.

>> we will