Citation

Feldman GD. International Journal of Phytoremediation 2005; 16(3): 487-498.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2005)

DOI

10.1080/09592290500207826

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This paper examines the reparations question from the perspective of its role in the post-1924 period. Particular attention is paid to the work of Albert Ritschl on the reparations regimes between 1924 and 1934. He stresses the competition between Germany's public and private debts and the importance of Germany's role as a sovereign debtor that could not commit national suicide by fulfilling its obligations at any social and political price but that sought to maintain its credit by giving primacy to its private obligations at the expense of reparations. There was some learning from the past after 1945. The London Debt Agreement of 1953 precluded a conflict between private and public debts by an exclusive concentration on private debts and the restoration of German credit. © Taylor & Francis, Inc.

Language: en