Abstract
Boundary-making in Istria is an old undertaking. It has actually never ceasesed, not even today. Istrian peninsula has thus undergone substantial boundary shifts during the last couple of centuries (especially after the Venetian demise in 1797). But Istria carries its worldwide fame also due to one of probably the harshest disputes on the post-war European grounds – the Trieste territory dispute. In author's perspective, this dispute is one of the four main corner-stones of the current Slovenian-Croatian boundary dispute. The remaining three include the Kozler's boundary around Dragonja (Rokava) River, the ungraspable notions of Austrian censuses in Istria, and the narratives of partisan settlements on military jurisdiction. However, there are other very important aspects which significantly shaped the development of the dispute, but we will focus at assessing the importance of the aforementioned ones. In this sense, the analysis of the effects of the outcome of the Trieste dispute and its implications to the contemporary interstate dispute is set forth. By unveiling its material and consequently its psychological effects upon the contemporary bilateral relations, its analyses simultaneously reveals backgrounds of never answered question, why Kozler's proposed linguistic boundary around Dragonja (Rokava) River turned out to become a boundary of national character. Though nowadays disputed, there is absolutely no chance for both involved parties to substantially draw away from once decisively drawn line of a layman. Despite the fierce battle of words in Slovenian public media on whether should the interstate boundary be placed on Mirna (Quieto) or Dragonja Rivers, it will be argued here that the actual choice of the Valley of Dragonja as a boundary is by all means Slovenian. The arguments are based on extensive analyses of cartographic materials, relevant literature, documents, and statistical data.
Highlights
After decades of "living in another world", he decided one day to unite his comrades once again and go for a final stroke. His martyr's ambition was stopped by the regular Slovenian police squad, which he had eventually confused with the German enemies, and a fierce battle to the last man broke out
Bearing in mind that when settling the border between Italy and Yugoslavia in 1954, and more definitely by the Treaty of Osimo in 1975, Slovenia felt as the republic, which gave up the most of its population and territory in order to win the maximum for Yugoslavia in Istria since the delimitation between Italy and Yugoslavia roughly followed the principle of an "ethnic equilibrium"
The Slovenian aspirations for a territorial access to high seas make a Gordian knot with the Croatian claims that Croatia territorially borders Italy at the sea
Summary
Geoadria 17/1 (2012) 25-43 analizom također se otkriva pozadina nikad odgovorenog pitanja – zašto je lingvistička granica oko Rijeke Dragonje (Rokave) koju je predložio Kozler postala granica od nacionalnog značenja. Iako je danas navedena granica često osporavana, teško je očekivati da će obje strane odustati od granice koju je jednom odredio laik. Unatoč snažnim prijeporima u slovenskim javnim medijima vezanim uz pitanje treba li međudržavna granica biti na rijekama Mirni i Dragonji, u radu je utvrđeno da je izbor granice u dolini rijeke Dragonje zapravo slovenski. Argumenti se temelje na opsežnoj analizi kartografskih materijala, relevantne literature, dokumenata i statističkih podataka. Ključne riječi: granice, granični sporovi, Triest/Trieste/Trst, Dragonja/Dragogna, Mirna/Quieto, Slovenija, Hrvatska, sjeverni Jadran, Istra
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
