Case Of Former Yugoslavia Research Articles

Alberto Basciani and Egidio Ivetic. Italia e Balcani. Storia di una prossimità

Alberto Basciani and Egidio Ivetic. <i>Italia e Balcani. Storia di una prossimità</i>

Politicization of Religion, The Power of Symbolism: The Case of Former Yugoslavia and its Successor States, edited by Gorana Ognjenović and Jasna Jozelić

Politicization of Religion, The Power of Symbolism: The Case of Former Yugoslavia and its Successor States, edited by Gorana Ognjenović and Jasna Jozelić

Politicization of Religion. The Power of Symbolism. The Case of Former Yugoslavia and its Successor States

Politicization of Religion. The Power of Symbolism. The Case of Former Yugoslavia and its Successor States

Politicization of Religion, the Power of Symbolism: The Case of Former Yugoslavia and its Successor States. Edited by Gorana Ognjenović and Jasna Jozelić . New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. xxi + 223 pp. $105.00 Cloth

Politicization of Religion, the Power of Symbolism: The Case of Former Yugoslavia and its Successor States. Edited by Gorana Ognjenović and Jasna Jozelić . New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. xxi + 223 pp. $105.00 Cloth - Volume 9 Issue 1

Bibliographical Sources

Bibliographical Sources Compiled by Michele Frucht Levy Bakić-Hayden, Milica. 1995. “Nesting Orientalisms: The Case of Former Yugoslavia.” Slavic Review 54 (4): 917–31. Burgwyn, H. James. 2005. Empire on the Adriatic: Mussolini’s Conquest of Yugoslavia, 1941–1943. New York: Enigma Books. Byford, Jovan. “The Semlin Judenlager in Belgrade: A Contested Memory.” The Holocaust and the United Nations Outreach Programme Discussion Papaers Series. Available at http://www.un.org/en/holocaustremembrance/docs/paper20.shtml. Carpi, Daniel. 1977. “The Rescue of Jews in the Italian Zone of Occupied Croatia.” in Rescue Attempts during the Holocaust, edited by Yisrael Gutman and Efraim Zuroff, 468–506. Jerusalem: Yad Vashem. Freidenreich, Harriet Pass. 1979. The Jews of Yugoslavia: A Quest for Community. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America. Gaon, Alksandar, ed. 2005. We Survived: Yugoslav Jews on the Holocaust. 2 vols. Belgrade: Jewish Historical Museum, Federation of Jewish Communities in Yugoslavia. Gitman, Esther. 2011. When Courage Prevailed: The Rescue and Survival of Jews in the Independent State of Croatia 1941–1945. St. Paul, MN: Paragon House. Gumz, Jonathan. 2001. “Wehrmacht Perceptions of Mass Violence in Croatia, 1941–42.” The Historical Journal 44 (4): 1015–38. Hehn, Paul. 1971. “Serbia, Croatia, and Germany 1941–1945: Civil War in the Balkans.” Canadian Slavonic Papers 13 (4): 344–73. Hyder Patterson, Patrick. 2003. “On the Edge of Reason: The Boundaries of Balkanism in Slovenian, Austrian, and Italian Discourse.” Slavic Review 62 (1): 110–41. Jezernik, Božidar. 2004. Wild Europe: The Balkans in the Gaze of Western Travellers. London: Saqi Books. Levy, Michele Frucht. 2009. “‘The Last Bullet for the Last Serb’: The Ustaša Genocide against Serbs, 1941–1945.” Nationalities Papers 37 (6): 807–37. [End Page 193] Lituchy, Barry M., ed. 2006. Jasenovac and the Holocaust in Yugoslavia: Analyses and Survivor Testimonies. Brooklyn, NY: Jasenovac Research Institute. Manoschek, Walter. 2000. “The Extermination of the Jews in Serbia.” In National Socialist Extermination Policies: Contemporary German Perspective, edited by Ulrich Herbert, 163–85. New York: Berghahn Books. Nagy, Péter Tibor. 1997. “The Social and Political History of Hungarian Education.” Manuscript, University of Pésc John Wesley College. Available at http://mek.oszk.hu/03700/03797/03797.pdf. [First published in C. Wulf, ed. Education for the 21st Century. Münster: Waxmann, 1997.] Open University, Faculty of Social Sciences. “Semlin Judenlager in Public Memory.” Available at http://www.open.ac.uk/socialsciences/semlin/. Porter, Thomas Earl. 2009. “Hitler’s Rassenkampf in the East: The Forgotten Genocide of Soviet POWs.” Nationalities Papers 37 (6): 839–59. Ristović, Milan. 2010. “Jews in Serbia during World War II.” In Serbia: Righteous among Nations, edited by Milan Fogel, Milan D. Ristović, and Milan Koljanin. Belgrade: JOZ. Available at http://www.udi.rs/articles/Ristovic_JEWS%20IN%20SERBIA.pdf. Romano, Jaša Salomon. 1980. Jevreji Jugoslave 1941–1945: Žrtve Genocida i Učesnici Narodnosloodilčkog Rata. Belgrade: Jevrejski Istorijski Muzej, Saveza jevrejskih opština Jugoslavije. Soleim Steinberg, Jonathan. 2002. All or Nothing: The Axis and The Holocaust. London: Routledge. Tomasevich, Jozo. 1981. War and Revolution in Yugoslavia, 1941–1945: Occupation and Collaboration. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Trifković, Srdjan. 1993. “Rivalry between Germany and Italy in Croatia, 1942–1943.” Historical Journal 36 (4): 879–904. Todorova, Maria. 1997. Imagining the Balkans. New York: Oxford University Press. Wolff, Larry. 1994. Inventing Eastern Europe: The Map of Civilization on the Mind of the Enlightenment. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. [End Page 194] Michele Frucht Levy mfrucht45@gmail.com Copyright © 2016 Serbian Studies

Introduction: the ‘Second World's’ architecture and planning in the ‘Third World’

This themed issue of The Journal of Architecture focuses on what appears to be a major blind-spot of current architectural historiography of the post-war period: the transfer of architecture and pl...

Séparation politique et désintégration commerciale

Résumé Des études récentes indiquent que la désintégration politique est à l’origine d’une désintégration commerciale importante et rapide. Dans cet article, nous nuançons ce résultat et montrons que la structure des échanges évolue lentement. À partir du cas de l’ex-Yougoslavie, nous ne trouvons aucune forme de désintégration commerciale forte et continue. Au contraire, les États successeurs continuent de commercer intensément entre eux plusieurs années après la désintégration politique. En outre, nous montrons que la désintégration commerciale est affectée par le processus de transition. Ainsi, les réformes institutionnelles apparaissent être un facteur explicatif de l’« effet frontière » en favorisant l’intégration des économies en transition dans l’économie mondiale.

Truth and reconciliation: Yes, please! No, thank you!

The case of former Yugoslavia and its successors is specific and a bit different from the other post-conflict societies. First, retributive model of justice is carried out, or it should be carried out, before the International Criminal Tribunal in the Hague. The question is how to start the process of searching for the truth and reconciliation inside and between societies, groups and individuals in newly established countries. There is no such a model in the world, like these in South Africa and some countries in Latin America, which can be applied here, because in this case we are talking about five states, from which at least three were in the war. Also, the character of these conflicts covers the diapason from international conflicts to internal aggression and civil war.

Central secession: Towards a new analytical concept? The case of former Yugoslavia

Political literature customarily defines secession as a movement developing in the periphery against the centre. This article questions this common assumption by raising the possibility that secession may be propelled by the centre. A working definition of ‘central secession' (or ‘secessionism by the centre') will be limited to those cases where a powerful nationalist movement operates from within the core or dominant nation(ality). The focus will be on the break-up of Yugoslavia ‐ the disintegration of which was consistently and widely perceived as a conflict of secessionist republics opposed by, and confronted with, a unitary state. A brief geo-political excursus of recent secessionist movements will serve to highlight the singularity of the Yugoslav ‘model'. In the case of Serbia, the rhetoric was adamantly unitarian, anti-secessionist, even anti-nationalist. It emphasised the defence of territorial integrity at all costs. In this way, the centre could cast itself as the spotless saviour of the country's integrity versus a ‘treacherous' periphery. In fact, the hidden agenda of the regime was ethnic separation ‐ of Serbs from non-Serbs.

The Conflict in former Yugoslavia as a « Fault Line War » ?

The case of former Yugoslavia serves as a tool to test the validity of Huntington's theory. The author's aim is to highlight the fundamental flaws in his theory in regards to Bosnia and former Yugoslavia, in particular by pointing out Huntington's neglect of nationalism as a driving force for conflict and his distorted picture of islam (especially in the case of Bosnia).

The distributive consequences of nationalism: The case of former Yugoslavia

IN RECENT YEARS the wheel of history apparently turned back in some parts of Europe, as several previously unified multinational countries broke up, following peaceful or bloody disintegration processes. If one is convinced that-in economic terms-integration is better than disintegration, because the latter reduces the market and increases transaction costs, and therefore diminishes the scope for the division of labour and economies of scale, one should conclude that there is no economic rationality in nationalism that leads to disintegration. And indeed, the traditional economic case for nationalism is one of a force that leads to the building and integration of nations, not the opposite. In this context the case of former Yugoslavia is certainly relevant for a variety of reasons. Observers have had a hard time finding rational processes behind the Yugoslav scenario; in fact, the explanation is usually based on collective irrationality, justified or at least strengthened by historical factors, which led entire peoples to actively fight for a future which outsiders consider to be inferior-in terms of consumers' welfare, social peace, economic expansion-to the previously existing one.1 Since the classical contributions by Viner and Meade, economic analysis has proved the benefits of economic integration under certain conditions, and has also considered the case of non-optimal trade and monetary areas,2 which can partly contribute to the explanation of the poor economic performance and ultimately the break-up of Yugoslavia. However, disintegration of previously economically unified states entails greater transaction costs, renunciation of the benefits of a larger market, and consequently of a greater division of labour and economies of scale. Under these circumstances, it is difficult to see a rational economic motive for nationalism and economic disintegration. Moreover, one should bear in mind that the disintegration of a previously unitary, although supposedly inefficient, system is usually followed by a rapid break down in the economic relations among its previous, now independent components, which is not easily off-set by closer links with other economies. This point is amply illustrated not only by Yugoslavia but also by the former members of the CMEA and the republics of the ex-Soviet Union. In all these cases, the relations among these countries have rapidly declined in both relative and absolute terms, and they have been replaced only in part by relations with other countries. Finally, disintegration is no guarantee of more effective and rapid systemic change, a point

Communal conflict as a challenge to international organization: the case of former Yugoslavia

Towards the end of the First World War, when allied leaders were considering the future structure of what was to become the League of Nations, Jan Christian Smuts of South Africa wrote:The animosities and rivalries among the independent Balkan States in the past, which kept that pot boiling, and occasionally boiling over, will serve to remind us that there is the risk of a similar state of affairs on a much larger scale in the New Europe, covered as it will be with small independent States. In the past the Empires kept the peace among the rival nationalities; the League will have to keep the peace among the new States formed from these nationalities. This will impose a task of constant and vigilant supervision on it.

Nesting Orientalisms: The Case of Former Yugoslavia

This paper introduces the notion of “nesting orientalisms” to investigate some of the complexity of the east/west dichotomy which has underlain scholarship on “Orientalism” since the publication of Said's classic polemic, a discourse in which “East,” like “West,” is much more of a project than a place. While geographical boundaries of the “Orient“ shifted throughout history, the concept of “Orient” as “other” has remained more or less unchanged. Moreover, cultures and ideologies tacitly presuppose the valorized dichotomy between east and west, and have incorporated various “essences” into the patterns of representation used to describe them. Implied by this essentialism is that humans and their social or cultural institutions are “governed by determinate natures that inhere in them in the same way that they are supposed to inhere in the entities of the natural world.” Thus, eastern Europe has been commonly associated with “backwardness,” the Balkans with “violence,” India with “idealism” or “mysticism,” while the west has identified itself consistently with the “civilized world.“

La sécurité collective : chimère, éphémère ou mutante ?

The joint international action against Iraq and the search for a new security doctrine following the end of the Cold War, led, in the early '90s, to a revival of the notion of collective security embodied in several international agreements. This notion is based on the assumption of responding collectively to international aggression. However, the international guagmires of recent years and especially the case of former Yugoslavia where international organizations have played the role of alibi to agression, has once more, dealt a major blow to the illusion of the implementation of the principles of collective security. In a way similar to the 1930s and the bipolar balance of power of the Cold War, collective security seems ephemeral today. We can therefore safelypredict that in the foreseeable future, international relations wilt continue to be shaped by the balance of specific state interests and not by universally applied principles of collective security.

Decision-making by the Security Council: The case of former Yugoslavia

Decision-making by the Security Council: The case of former Yugoslavia