Suchergebnisse

According to Paul Kahn, one of the leading American constitutional theorists, the terms 'nation' and 'national sovereignty' are beyond the moral argument. From the perspective of constitutional ontology, the nation is the community of all those who share the 'political eros' love of the nation, who are ready to respond to her call and, if necessary, lay down their lives on the altar of its self-preservation. The moral debate about the limits of nation's state is meaningless, tells us Kahn. The boundaries of all, even liberal states arise through a 'make sacrifices' they 'never just a matter of geography', and therefore 'there is no abstract drawing of borders by some principle of justice. As in the life of the individual, the limits have the same necessity: There is nothing abstract in that necessity.'. Adapted from the source document.

The author is of the opinion that with the fall of the Berlin wall not all obs the free circulation of goods and people were eliminated - neither in Europe n other regions of the world, since there are numerous other walls standing in the way of establishing a global world or European order. In that context, the agreement among the members of the European Union on the comprehensive control of "its borders" towards the non-member European countries, is conside by the author as a specific form of a new "curtain", not "iron" any longer, but electronic. Its function, the author claims, is to divide Europe into the Union and the Non-Union, which is harmful for the promotion of the European idea in the spiritual and the material sense in many ways. (SOI : PM: S. 30)

The author claims that all major efforts concerning European security have always been linked with the end of a war. Thus the end of the cold war has been marked with the expansion of NATO and an attempt to create a new security. By analysing the political scope of the expansion, the military and strategic framework, the Russian reactions, and the economic significance, the author comes to the conclusion that the expansion is not conducive to the establishment of an integral system of European security. The purpose of this development by Clinton's team was primarily to outline the new European borders (the key aspect of Clinton's foreign policy) and, in the future, to create the conditions for further expansion and admittance of new members. Only in the remote future, through constant expansion and links with other European organisations, NATO could turn into the central system of European security. (SOI : PM: S. 97)

The often controversial discussions about the problem of the Jewish refugees from Central European countries since 1938 - held at the level of the Government of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, but also at different "lower administrative levels" (provinces, districts, and local municipalities), with the participation of various directly or indirectly interested parties, whose numbers grew considerably on the eve of the war in 1941 - including the issue of the status of several categories of persons with foreign citizenship (or with no citizenship at all). Apart from the "real refugees" and immigrants, these discussions also dwelled on the issue of the status of "Jewish tourists" from Germany, Austria, the Czech Republic, the neighboring Yugoslav states as well as Palestine. The attempts to find the most favorable solution for the state of Yugoslavia reflected all the dilemmas of the Yugoslav authorities about how to "neutralize the problem" of the Jewish refugees from Germany, who after the National Socialists' rise to power, in 1933, began arriving to the Yugoslav borders, too.

Ethnic minorities and minorities-related conflicts have always been one of the most important security issues for international community. The durability of ethnic conflicts in certain regions and the difficulties in thei resolution, have resulted in the outbreak of many armed conflicts, the collapse of multi-ethnic states, the changes of borders and of demographic relations. Despite the increasing number of security challenges and needs, it is still not possible to talk about a certain uniform and universally accepted model of solving the problems among ethnic minorities. It is obvious that in the postcoldwar period this is going to be an increasingly pressing need of international community. The paper deals with most basic security problems which are caused by the unsettled relationships between ethnic minorities and majority; it also covers the policies of their resolution. By analysing the model of resolving ethnic conflicts in South Tyrol, two groups of ethnic conflicts' resolution policies are looked into: the policy of the elimination of differences and the policy of managing differences. (SOI : PM: S. 59)

The dissolution of the great Soviet empire and the demise of the socialist system in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe has undoubtedly been one of the most significant political developments at the turn of the 20th century. Whether this has been brought about by international factors or has been the consequence of the internal cave-in of the system, has been the subject of numerous and extensive analyses. It is obvious that the geostrategic shifts and the completely altered position of the new state (the Russian Federation) have made it necessary to look into the political aspect of the problem. That Russia is not faced with an imminent threat from abroad is certainly an extraordinary change, unprecedented in the long Russian history. This particularly applies to the western Russian borders, which used to be almost continually threatened. Political relations that have been developing between Russia and the West, despite all the obstacles, have been improving and both sides demonstrate a willingness to continue with this trend. (SOI : PM: S. 167)

The end of the "cold war" brought about the emergence of geopolitics which has not been to such an extent burdened with the former international geopolitical views. One of the most significant shifts has been the recognition that geopolitical events cannot be limited to national states and their borders. Of course, states are still central for the world's geopolitical map, but no longer as the sole factors in the global geopolitical system. On the one hand and under the influence of globalization, new conditions have arisen, influenced by geopolitical factors; on the other, new entities are emerging whose influence is very similar to that of the central factors - contemporary states. These similarities are primarily reflected in the claims of sovereign control over a certain territory, the organization of government on it, the shaping of a particular national identity by the majority population, and so on. It is these new territorial and political units that contribute to the deconstruction of the geopolitical order; the disintegration of the Soviet Union is the best illustration. (SOI : PM: S. 88)

Until their arrival to the territories they occupy today, Croats were greatly dependent on Danube, the region of their settlements, wars, and life in general. However, they were not the leading political group, and they were not merchants. These two facts made the great nations which decide on the world's fate to forget that Croatia was not only a maritime, but also a Danubian country, and that its future rested primarily on the development of its border-line position between East and West. From the rich history of Danubian region the author of the present paper offers a few ideas and several facts, not taking into account the whole scope of this problem in the present day and also in the history of Croats on the shores of Danube. This problem can and should be investigated multidisciplinary, confronting the actual economic analyses with the past events, which would allow to make at least some conclusions about the importance of Danube region for Croatia as an unavoidable determinant of Croatian state and its inalienable borders. (SOI : CSP: S. 308)

The issue of territorial disputes is a problem of a large number of states. These problems exists in the EU and in countries candidate for accession to this organization. As to the former Yugoslav republics following the collapse of the common state, the problems are created in terms of determining the territory. The issue of borders after the dissolution of a federal state such as Yugoslavia, creating major problems that can be solved only by applying two basic principles - the principle of demarcation and the principle of self-determination of nation. In international law there is no general rule, according to which the retreating boundary between the states. The author deals with issues of particular territorial disputes in the EU and between the EU countries and countries of the Western Balkan. Practically, these disputes between EU countries have existed before, and have not been resolved to their joining the organization. Whether the EU can guarantee resolution of these disputes is one of the issues raised in the paper, given that many disputes are not settled in countries that are longer or shorter time-EU countries. The conclusion is that it can not, because there are no adequate tools for this so that all the leaves to the states in disputes.

The author primarily studies the works of Croatian and non-Croatian theologians and historians puplished since the 1980s which deal with the cultural and political activities of the Serbian Orthodox Church in Croatia and Bosnia-Hercegovina. In the article's introduction, the author stresses that in recent times there has been a growth of interest in this topic because of the increased political activity of the Serbian Orthodox Church in the former Yugoslavia and its attitude toward Serbian aggression in Croatia and Bosnia-Hercegovina. He also cites publications written by Croatians and non-Croatians that were published from 1918 to 1982. The main issues of his analysis are the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Pec outside of the Ottoman Empire's borders; the problem of the union of churches during the 17th and 18th centuries; the role of the Serbian Orthodox Church in the process of Serbian national integration in Croatia and Bosnia-Hercegovina during the 19th and early 20th century; and finally, the problem of theological debates and political developments during the 20th century. Special emphasis is also placed on the behaviour of the Church during the course of the Second World War, when it collaborated with German occupational forces. After the war, the Serbian Orthodox Church not only kept silent about this, but it also made unsubstantiated claims about the wartime collaboration of the Croatian Catholic Hierarchy and the Croatian people. The author concludes by saying that further research is needed into these and other related topics so that new light may be thrown on the more than three hundred year long history of the Serbian Orthodox Church in Croatia. (SOI : CSP: S. 176)

Познато је, и у научној литератури мање-више елаборирано да је повратак религији на подручју бивше СФРЈ ишао руку под руку са стварањем нових националних држава и успостављањем нових/старих етничких граница и идентитета. Због тога је логично што се ова појава често квалификује као религија нације и национализма. Међутим, из ове квалификације често изостаје увид у чињеницу да је повратак религији значио и повећање интересовања за религијска учења и знања, те масовније учествовање у црквеним обредима. Иако је извесно да од високог процента оних који су се на последњем попису идентификовали као православни Срби сасвим мали део одлази на активне вернике, евидентна обнова унутрашњег, литургијског живота Цркве сугерише одређена питања и опрезност при етикетирању савремених облика религиозности и улоге Цркве у њиховом формирању. Историјске околности које доводе до појаве религије нације у Србији у 19. веку чине оправданом хипотезу да религија нације ни тада, а ни данас није изникла из крила Цркве, већ да се она појављује као државни/секуларни идеолошки пројекат, чије су везе са религијом сасвим нерелигијске природе. Да бих поткрепила ову тврдњу, покушаћу да установим и покажем шта се налазило у основама ове световне религије 19. века, те да одговорим на питање начина обликовања њених садржаја. Ово ћу учинити на основу анализе политичке употребе мртвих тела, тј. доношења посмртних остатака Вука Караџића из Беча у Београд и обнављања гроба Доситеја Обрадовића том приликом. ; It is widely known and has been more or less elaborated in scientific literature that return to religion in the area of former SFRY was conducted hand-in-hand with the development of the new national states and establishment of new/old ethnic borders and identities. This is why it is logical that this phe- nomenon is frequently qualified as the religion of the nation and nationalism. However, this qualification frequently lacks insight into the fact that return to religion also meant increased interest in religious teachings and dogmas, as well as greater attendance at Church rituals. Even though it is certain that, among the large percentage of those who declared themselves as Orthodox Serbs during the last Census, a very small number of them are actually active believers; thus, the evident restoration of the internal, liturgical life of the Church suggests certain issues and advises prudence in labeling modern forms of religiousness and the role of the Church in their development. Historical conditions which led to the phenomenon of religion of the nation in Serbia in 19 century justify the hypothesis that religion of the nation was not, and still is not, something to have sprouted out under the auspices of the Church, but that it has occurred as a state/secular ideological project, whose links to religion are of purely non-religious nature. In order to corroborate this statement, I will try to determine and show what was in the basis of this secular religion of 19 century, and answer the question relating to the manner in which its content was shaped. I will do this based on an analysis of political use of dead bodies, i.e. relocation of mortal remains of Vuk Karadžić from Vienna to Belgrade, and restoration of the grave of Dositej Obradović, which was performed on the same occa- sion.

Докторска дисертација «Русија на почетку XXI века – геополитичка анализа» је рад који се састоји из шест делова. У првом делу «Теоретско – методолошки увод» је постављена методолошко појмовна основа рада, извршен преглед досадашњих истраживања на ову тему и сабрани и анализирани потребни извори и литература. Други део «Физичко – географске одлике територије данашње Русије» се бави анализом и вредновањем рељефа и педолошког покривача, климе, хидрографског потенцијала, биљног и животињског света, те рудног и енергетског блага на подручју савремене Русије. Док су први и други део рада квантитативно невелики (слично петом и шестом делу), трећи и четврти део обухватају највећи део дисертације. Трећи део «Историјска анализа геополитичке позиције Русије» се бави територијалним развојем руске државе кроз историју, при чему су анализирани и остали геополитички значајни фактори генезе њеног историјског положаја. Посебно је посматран утицај који су на Русију кроз историју имали континенти на којима се распростире, а извршена је и анализа билатералних историјских односа са најзначајнијим суседима и светским силама, где су уочене и извесне геополитичке правилности (по историчару Броделу то би биле историјске појаве «средњег» и «дугог трајања»). Четврти део «Геополитичка позиција савремене Русије» анализира данашњу Русију са унутрашње и међународне позиције. У оквиру унутрашње позиције се анализира економија, демографија, социолошка структура, култура и унутрашњо – политичка позиција савремене руске државе. У односу на окружење се анализира укупна позиција Русије у свету и посебно у односу на суседе и поједине важне државе (са свим државама Европе и Азије и са најважнијим силама на другим континентима). Пети део «Перспективе Русије у следећим деценијама XXI века» садржи основне елементе предвиђања унутрашњег развоја земље, као и њену позицију у светским токовима. Шести део је прегледни «Закључак». ; Doktorska disertacija «Rusija na početku XXI veka – geopolitička analiza» je rad koji se sastoji iz šest delova. U prvom delu «Teoretsko – metodološki uvod» je postavljena metodološko pojmovna osnova rada, izvršen pregled dosadašnjih istraživanja na ovu temu i sabrani i analizirani potrebni izvori i literatura. Drugi deo «Fizičko – geografske odlike teritorije današnje Rusije» se bavi analizom i vrednovanjem reljefa i pedološkog pokrivača, klime, hidrografskog potencijala, biljnog i životinjskog sveta, te rudnog i energetskog blaga na području savremene Rusije. Dok su prvi i drugi deo rada kvantitativno neveliki (slično petom i šestom delu), treći i četvrti deo obuhvataju najveći deo disertacije. Treći deo «Istorijska analiza geopolitičke pozicije Rusije» se bavi teritorijalnim razvojem ruske države kroz istoriju, pri čemu su analizirani i ostali geopolitički značajni faktori geneze njenog istorijskog položaja. Posebno je posmatran uticaj koji su na Rusiju kroz istoriju imali kontinenti na kojima se rasprostire, a izvršena je i analiza bilateralnih istorijskih odnosa sa najznačajnijim susedima i svetskim silama, gde su uočene i izvesne geopolitičke pravilnosti (po istoričaru Brodelu to bi bile istorijske pojave «srednjeg» i «dugog trajanja»). Četvrti deo «Geopolitička pozicija savremene Rusije» analizira današnju Rusiju sa unutrašnje i međunarodne pozicije. U okviru unutrašnje pozicije se analizira ekonomija, demografija, sociološka struktura, kultura i unutrašnjo – politička pozicija savremene ruske države. U odnosu na okruženje se analizira ukupna pozicija Rusije u svetu i posebno u odnosu na susede i pojedine važne države (sa svim državama Evrope i Azije i sa najvažnijim silama na drugim kontinentima). Peti deo «Perspektive Rusije u sledećim decenijama XXI veka» sadrži osnovne elemente predviđanja unutrašnjeg razvoja zemlje, kao i njenu poziciju u svetskim tokovima. Šesti deo je pregledni «Zaključak». ; The doctor dissertation named "Russia in the beginning of the 21th century – geopolitical analyses" is the work which is consisting of the six parts. In the first part "Theoretical methodological introduction" is a setup of the methodologicaly conceptual basis of this work and noticed previous researches of this subject matter and summarized and analyzed the resources and literature. The second part of the work "Phiysical and geographical attributes of the nowdays Russian territory" engages in analyzing and valuing relief and soil cover, climate , hidrographycal potential, wildlife, mineral and energy resources of nowdays Russia. While the first and the second part of this work quantitative are a small (alike the fifth and the sixth parts of the work ) the third and the fourt parts borders is the largest part of dissertation . The third part of the work "An historical analyses geopolitical positions of Russia" engages in territorial development of the Russian Government trough its history whereat are analyzed another geopolitically important factors of genesis its historical position. Especially is observed influence to Russia by continents of its broadcasting and noticed some analyses of the bilateral historical attitudes to the most important neighbourhood and other major world powers , where is noticed some geopolitically regularities (accordin to a famous historian Brodel there are a historical apparations named a period of medium-sized duration and a period of long- sized duration) . The fourth part of the dissertation "Geopolitical position of modern Russia" analyzes nowdays Russia in domestic policy and international context .Within interior position is analysing economy, demography, social structures, culture, and domestic policy position of modern Russia. Concerning to surroundings is analysing position of Russia in wholle especially concerning to the neighbourhood and some important countries ( and all countries of Europe, Asia, and the most important powers of other continents). The fifth part "Perspective of Russia in the next decades of the 21 th century" conteins a basic elements of the anticipations of internal development and Russia's position in the world. The sixth part is a previewed "Epilogue".

Doktorska disertacija Jugoslovenska politika prema zemljama narodne demokratije u susedstvu 1953 – 1958. godine zasnovana je na jugoslovenskim arhivskim izvorima iz Arhiva Srbije i Crne Gore, Diplomatskog arhiva Ministarstva spoljnih poslova Republike Srbije i Vojnog arhiva kao i na relevantnoj domaćoj i stranoj literaturi. Disertacija se bavi jugoslovenskom politikom prema Albaniji, Bugarskoj, Rumuniji i Mađarskoj u periodu normalizacije odnosa Jugoslavije sa ovim zemljama posle Staljinove smrti tj. posle petogodišnjeg perioda tokom koga su njihovi odnosi bili u gotovo potpunom prekidu. Ona predstavlja pokušaj da se sagleda odnos Jugoslavije prema neposrednom susedstvu u uslovima hladnog rata i sadejstva jugoslovenskih interesa sa jedne i spoljnih faktora poput uloge Sovjetskog Saveza u procesu normalizacije odnosa Jugoslavije sa pomenutim zemljama ili uloge vodećih zapadnih zemalja i njihovih interesa u Jugoslaviji i susednim zemljama "narodne demokratije" sa druge strane. U nekoliko faza kroz koje su od marta 1953. do aprila 1958. godine prošli odnosi Jugoslavije sa Albanijom, Bugarskom, Rumunijom i Mađarskom (od Staljinove smrti do potpisivanja Beogradske deklaracije, od potpisivanja Beogradske deklaracije do XX kongresa KPSS-a, od XX kongresa KPSS-a do izbijanja događaja u Mađarskoj 1956. godine i od događaja u Mađarskoj do kritike novog Programa SKJ) jugoslovenska politika se menjala u skladu sa okolnostima zadržavajući kao konstante izražen interes za normalizaciju odnosa i insistiranje na tome da sve susedne zemlje "narodne demokratije" javno osude svoju raniju politiku prema Jugoslaviji i rehabilituju sve koji su na montiranim sudskim procesima osuđeni zbog špijunske delatnost u korist Jugoslavije. Osnovni cilj rada na ovoj dioktorskoj disertaciji je bio da pruži nova znanja o ovoj temi, nove poglede na jugoslovensku spoljnu politiku i ponudi novi ugao gledanja na odnose Jugoslavije sa SSSR-om i Varšavskim paktom u celini. U vezi sa tim definisan je i drugi cilj ovog rada koji se odnosi na rekonstrukciju jugoslovenske politike prema ovim zemljama i na pokušaj da se uoče specifičnosti, metode i ciljevi te politike koji su se razlikovali u odnosu na jugoslovensku politiku prema ostalim istočnoevropskim zemljama. Treći cilj na temu jugoslovenske politike prema susednim zemljama "narodne demokratije" od 1953. do 1958. godine bio je i sistematizacija postojećih znanja o ovoj temi i njihova evaluacija s obzirom na veći stepen dostupnosti izvora nego što je to bio slučaj pre više decenija kada su nastali najznačajniji radovi koji su se delimično bavili pojedinim segmentima ove teme. Četvrti cilj istraživanja bio je utvrđivanje hronološki jasno određenih faza kroz koje su prolazili odnosi Jugoslavije sa Mađarskom, Rumunijom, Bugarskom i Albanijom u posmatranom periodu i identifikacija faktora koji su na to uticali. U trenutku Staljinove smrti, susedne zemlje "narodne demokratije" bile su daleko od centra pažnje jugoslovenske spoljne politike jer je , između ostalog, i njihov značaj za nju u uslovima prekida međudržavnih odnosa bio mali. Međutim, promene koje su ubrzo posle Staljinove smrti usledile u Sovjetskom Savezu omogućile su početak normalizacije odnosa Jugoslavije i "prve zemlje socijalizma" što je za sobom povuklo i mogućnost da Jugoslavija normalizuje svoje odnose i sa susednim zemljama "narodne demokratije". Kada su u pitanju bile te zemlje, primarni jugoslovenski interes nije se nalazio u sferi politike i ekonomije kao u slučaju Sovjetskog Saveza već u sferi praktičnih međudržavnih pitanja koja su teško opterećivala Jugoslaviju. Na prvom mestu to je bio interes da se što pre otkloni vojna pretnja na granicama i stanje na zajedničkoj "liniji razgraničenja" koje je u godinama posle 1948. iziskivalo velika materijalna i kadrovska ulaganja. Osim toga, Jugoslavija je jasan interes imala i po pitanju poboljšanja položaja pripadnika jugoslovenskih manjina u susednim zemljama "narodne demokratije" kao i po pitanju normalizacije saobraćaja. Razlog što Jugoslavija nije pokazivala izražen interes za političku i ekonomsku saradnju sa ovim zemljama ležao je u činjenici da je ona u međuvremenu, u vreme godina sukoba, uspela da pronađe alternativu kako u sferi spoljne politike tako i u sferi ekonomije i na taj način obesmisli blokadu kojoj je bila izložena sa Istoka. Međutim, cena iznalaženja te alternative bila je visoka i pretila je da ugrozi monopol vlasti Saveza komunista Jugoslavije što je za Tita i njegovo najbliže okruženje bilo neprihvatljivo. Iz tog razloga, mogućnost da se nađe zajednički jezik sa Moskvom predstavljao je za Tita priliku da uspostavi ravnotežu kada je u pitanju bio jugoslovenski položaj prema suprotstavljenim blokovima u zaoštrenoj hladnoratovskoj atmosferi. Odnos Jugoslavije prema SSSR-u, i obrnuto, može se smatrati jednim od najznačajnijih faktora koji su uticali na oblikovanje jugoslovenske politike prema susednim zemljama "narodne demokratije" sa jedne i na kreiranje politike koje su sve istočnoevropske zemlje vodile prema Jugoslaviji sa druge strane. Drugi značajan faktor koji je uticao na jugoslovensku politiku prema zemljama "narodne demokratije" u susedstvu od 1953. do 1958. godine bio je u tesnoj vezi sa jugoslovensko-sovjetskim odnosima a ticao se prevashodno ideologije i s tim u vezi destaljinizacije. Kreirajući u godinama sukoba sa Informbiroom sopstveni model "samoupravnog" socijalizma, Jugoslavija tokom procesa normalizacije odnosa nije pristajala na "jedinstvo lagera" i povratak u njega što je bio glavni kamen spoticanja u njenim odnosima kakao sa SSSR-om tako i sa drugim istočnoevropskim zemljama pa i susednim kao što su bile Albanija, Bugarska, Mađarska i Rumunija. S tim u vezi je i destaljinizacija, odnosno njen napredak i dubina u susednim "zemljama" narodne demokratije kao i njihova spremnost da se distanciraju od staljinističke ideologije, predstavljala jedan od glavnih faktora koji su uticali na oblikovanje jugoslovenske politike prema tim zemljama. Najzad, važan činilac koji je uticao na jugoslovensku spoljnu politiku uopšte pa i na njenu politiku prema delu ili celini Istočnog bloka bili su i njeni odnosi sa Zapadom, koji su iz pragmatičnih razloga tokom godina sukoba sa Informbiroom bili poboljšani do te mere da su Jugoslaviju, iako nevoljno, doveli na rub uključenja u zapadni vojni savez. Zapad je bio taj kome se nije dopadalo jugoslovensko približavanje SSSR-u i istočnoevropskim zemljama i u periodu normalizacije njihovih odnosa svaki korak koji je vodio približavanju dveju do tada suprotstavljenih strana izazivao je na Zapadu sumnje u iskrenost Jugoslavije i zebnju kada je u pitanju bila budućnost odnosa Zapada i Jugoslavije. Kao rezultat sadejstva nekoliko najvažnijih spoljnih faktora i jugoslovenskih interesa u neposrednom susedstvu iz okvira socijalističkog "lagera" nastajala je jugoslovenska politika prema Istoku uopšte pa i prema Albaniji, Bugarskoj, Rumuniji i Mađarskoj ponaosob, onakva kakva je bila. U periodu od 1953. do 1958. godine ta politika je bila aktivna i pozitivna ali ne i bez ograda. Tih godina, Jugoslavija je bez sumnje pokazivala interes da normalizuje svoje odnose sa susedima sa kojima je osim granice delila i ideologiju ali najčešće nije želela da ona bude ta koja će dati inicijativu za konkretne korake u tom procesu. Smatrajući da su međusobni odnosi narušeni ne njenom već krivicom suseda, ona je strogo poštovala načelo (koje je inače zastupala i kada je u pitanju bila njena politika prema SSSR-u) da prvi korak treba da učini onaj koji je odgovoran za prekid normalnih dobrosusedskih odnosa. Imajući u vidu sve interese, želje i aspiracije koje je Jugoslavija imala kada je u pitanju bio prostor neposredno uz njene granice kao i faktore koji su neminovno uticali na njenu politiku, može se reći da je Jugoslavija prema zemljama "narodne demokratije" u susedstvu u periodu normalizacije međusobnih odnosa od 1953. do 1958. godine vodila politiku mogućeg. Ta politika, međutim, iako osmišljena na isti način, nije uvek bila ista prema svakoj pojedinačnoj zemlji u susedstvu iz prostog razloga što u njima nije nailazila na istovetne uslove i mogućnosti. Tamo gde su mogućnosti bile veće, Jugoslavija je postizala više. Međutim, kako je vreme odmicalo i kako je Jugoslavija bivala sve uspešnija u pronalaženju svog sopstvenog "trećeg puta", čini se da joj je sve manje i manje bilo stalo do sadržajnije saradnje sa većinom suseda od kojih je (budući da su sve bile deo Istočnog bloka), u skladu sa svojom novom spoljnopolitičkom strategijom koja je ekvidistancu prema blokovima predviđala kao imperativ, trebalo da napravi određeni otklon. ; The Ph.D. thesis Yugoslav Policy Towards the Neighboring Countries of People's Democracy 1953-1958 is based on Yugoslav archival sources from the Archives of Yugoslavia, the Diplomatic Archives of the Foreign Ministry of the Republic of Serbia and the Military Archives, as well as on the relevant domestic and foreign literature. The thesis deals with Yugoslav policy towards Albania, Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary during the period of normalization of relations between these countries and Yugoslavia after Stalin's death, i.e. after a five years' period of almost complete interruption in bilateral relations. It is an attempt at a study of the interplay of Yugoslavia's relations with immediate neighborhood during the Cold War and Yugoslav interests on the one hand, and interests of foreign factors, such as the Soviet Union and the leading Western nations in Yugoslavia and in the neighboring countries within the framework of the normalization of Yugoslavia's relations with the above mentioned countries. During the several phases the Yugoslav relations with Albania, Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary went through between March 1953 and April 1958 (from Stalin's death until the signing of the Belgrade Declaration, from then to the 20th congress of the CP of the USSSR, from then until the beginning of the events in Hungary in 1956 and from then until the critique of the new Program of the CP of Yugoslavia), the Yugoslav policy changed in accordance with the situation, preserving the interest in normalizing relations and insisting that all neighboring countries of "people's democracy" should condemn their former policy towards Yugoslavia and rehabilitate all those who had been sentenced as Yugoslav spies at show trials. The main goal of this Ph.D. thesis was to provide new knowledge of the topic, new views on Yugoslav foreign policy and to propose a new vantage point on the Yugoslav relations with the Soviet Union, and on relations with the Warsaw Pact as a whole. Connected with this was another goal of the thesis that concrens the reconstruction of Yugoslav policy toward these countries and the attempt to pinpoint the characteristics, methods and goals of that policy that were different from those of Yugoslav policy toward other east European countries. The third goal of the topic of Yugoslav policy toward the neighboring countries of "people's democracy" between 1953 and 1958 was also to systematize the existing knowledge on the subject in view of better accessability of sources as compared with the situation of several decades ago when the most important works touching upon some aspects of this topic were written. The fourth goal of the research was to determin chronologically clearly defined phases that the Yugoslav relations with Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Albania had gone through during the researched period and to identify the factors that influenced the process. At the time of Stalin's death the countries of "people's democracy" were far from the focus of the Yugoslav foreign policy, because, among other things, their importance was small due to the severed inter-state relations. However, the changes that set in the Soviet Union soon after Stalin's death made the beginning of normalization of relations with the "first country of socialism" possible. This entailed the possibility that Yugoslavia also normalizes its relations with neighboring countries of "people's democracy". When these countries were in question, Yugoslavia's primary interest didn't lie in political or economic spheres as in the case of the Soviet Union, but rather in the sphere of practical inter-state matters weighting heavily on Yugoslavia. Supreme was the interest to do away as soon as possible with the military threat on the borders and to change the situation on the "line of demarcation" that had required much material and human resources in the years after 1948. Furthermore, Yugoslavia had a clear interest in improving the situation of members of Yugoslav minorities in the neighboring countries of "people's democracy", as well as in normalization of trafic. The reason why Yugoslavia showed no great interest in political or economic cooperation with these countries lay in the fact that she had in the meantime, during the years of conflict, found alternative solutions in the spheres of foreign policy and economy, reducing thus to insignifficance the blocade imposed on her from the East. However, the price of that alternative solution was high and it threatened to endanger the power monopoly of the Union of the Communists of Yugoslavia, which was unacceptable for Tito and his innermost circle of collaborators. For that reason, the possibility of finding common grounds with Moscow was for Tito an oportunity to balance Yugoslavia's position between the two competing blocs in a worsened Cold War atmosphere. Yugoslavia's relation to the USSSR and vice versa, can be seen as one of the most important factors influencing Yugoslav policy toward the neighboring countries of "people's democracy" on the one hand, and on the other, one that was decisively shaping their policy towards Yugoslavia. Another important factor influencing Yugoslav policy toward the countries of "people's democracy" in the vicinity between 1953 and 1958 was closely connected with the Yugoslav-Soviet relations and it concerned primarily ideology and, in that context, destalinization. Having created her own model of "self-managing" socialism during the years of conflict with the Cominform, during the process of normalization Yugoslavia didn't accept the unity of the Eastern Bloc and the matter of her return to it was one of the main stumbling blocks both in her relations with the USSR and with the neighbors such as Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania. In that context, destalinisation, i.e. its progress and depth in the neighboring countries of "people's democracy" and their willingnes to distance themselves from the Stalinist ideology was one of the major factors influencing Yugoslavia's policy toward those countries. Finally, the important factor influencing Yugoslav foreign policy in general, including part of the Eastern Block or it as a whole, were Yugoslavia's relations with the West that had been so improved during the years of conflict with the Cominform, that they led Yugoslavia, although unwillingly, to the brink of joining the western military alliance. The West was unhappy with Yugoslav rapprochement with the USSR and eastern European countries and every step that brought closer the two once confonted parties during the process of normalization of their relations, caused the West to doubt Yugoslavia's sincerety and cause fears for the future relations between the West and Yugoslavia. As a result of interplay of several major foreign political factors and Yugoslav interests in the imediate socialist block neighborhood, the Yugoslav policy toward the East in general and toward Albania, Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary individually, emerged in the given form. Between 1953 and 1958 that policy was active and positive, but not without restrains. During those years Yugoslavia clearly showed interest in normalizing her relations with the neighboring countries with whom she shared not only borders, but ideology too, but in most cases she was not willing to be the one to initiate concrete steps in that process. Deeming that it had not been her fault but that of her neighbors that the bilateral relations had been spoiled, she observed strictly the principle (that she also championed in her relations with the USSR) that the side that had been responsible for the interruption of normal good neighborly relations should also make the first move. Having in mind all the interests, wishes and aspirations that Yugoslavia had concerning the space imediatly bordering on her territory as well as the factors necessarily infuencing her policy, it can be said that Yugoslavia led the policy of what was possible toward the neighboring countries of "people's democracy" during tthe period of normalization of bilateral relations 1953-1958. However, that policy wasn't always the same toward all these neighboring countries, for simple reason that it didn't meet with the same conditions and possibilities in them. Where possibilities were greater, Yugoslavia acheived more. However, as the time went by and as Yugoslavia became increasingly more successful in finding her own "third way", it seems she was increasingly less interested in substantial cooperation with most of the neighbors from whom (since they were all members of the Eastern Block) certain distance should be kept – in keeping with the new foreign political strategy that foresaw equidistance towards both blocs as a must.