Suchergebnisse

The disintegration of the socialist regime in Europe did away with the bipolar model of world order and inaugurated a new phase in seeking a new structure and model of international relations. This new world order, only broadly outlined and characterised by (mostly) unilateral leadership, has already been challenged. Two superpowers China and Russia - condemn the hegemony, unilateralism and the attempts at dictating the international relations. China and Russia are supported by a group of disgruntled countries who also think that a broadly-based multi-polarity is the direction that inter-national relations and the new world order should take. Judging by these challenges and criticisms it might be said that only multilateral co-operativeness can guarantee validity to the nascent world order. (SOI : PM: S. 93)

In the last twenty years the world has undergone serious changes, unfortunately not in positive direction. The collapse of the bipolar system and the establishment of one bloc hegemony - NATO headed by the USA, has not only failed to establish more stable and secure international relations, but, on the contrary, it has corresponded with the greatest insecurity and uncertainty of the mankind ever since World War II till the present day. After the 'counter-balance' disappeared, there has been open political, economic, even direct military, interference by the Alliance states in the sovereignty of many countries. Consequently, the world's conflicting potential has largely increased. Apart from the threats present from earlier, the contemporary world is faced with a series of new, formerly unknown or marginal, ones. The most notable among them are: uncontrolled escalation of armed conflicts; international terrorism; proliferation of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction; expansion of drugs trafficking; illegal cross-border migrations; human trafficking and trafficking in human organs; piracy; criminalization of different areas of living; etc. The economic and financial crises have additionally warned the world of the limitedness of natural resources and, in the most serious form, posed the issue of the fight for preservation, or conquest of areas rich in raw minerals. Apart from the current courses of action in the fight for control over the natural resources, both new methods of action and new areas of contest are emerging (Arctic, Antarctic .; above and under the Earth's surface; on the sea, and under the sea bottom), over which the interests of great powers will be increasingly conflicting. Michael Klare, the author of well-known books 'Blood and Oil' and 'Resource Wars', convincingly evokes a growing hunger for resources by the picturesque title of his latest book 'Race for What's Left: Global Scramble for the World's Last Resources'. For success in this new competition in strength and skills, new strategic concepts are required. Some have already been created and preliminarily tested; others are being prepared for implementation and corrected 'on the go' based on the performance of already proved solutions; still others are being hurriedly shaped. Understandably, along with this, what actual and potential rivals do related to this, or what their activities suggest, is watched closely.

For over a century, rumours have been spread from Croatia about Serbia's intention to create a Greater Serbia and its aspirations to greater Serbian hegemony. This has been a constant refrain in all anti-Serbian speeches delivered both before the Yugoslav and international public. On the one hand, the Serbs and Serbia were presented as aggressors with great territorial appetites, whereas on the other, the aim was to conceal one's own aggression and territorial pretensions to the ethnic, state and historical territories that belonged to others. Though such tactics is a well-known and long-lasting feature of Croatian politics, it has not been given an appropriate place and explanation in Serbian and foreign historiography. Croatia inherited such political approach from Austria-Hungary which demonised and satanised the Serbian intentions aimed at liberation and unification all the more so as its appetites towards the territories in the Balkans increased and as it more strongly expounded the German Drang nach Osten policy. According to such tactical approach, everything that was Serbian was proclaimed greater Serbian in order to nip in the bud and thwart Serbian interests which conflicted with the AustroHungarian ones. Following in the wake of Austro-Hungarian policy, in which they participated and often played the leading role, in all historical periods – from the 1848 revolution to this day the Croats have been denouncing Serbian often labelling it as greater Serbian. By reviling Serbhood and greater Serbhood, in which they saw the main rival to Croatdom and greater Croatdom, Croatian politicians did not only dream about a Greater Croatia, but also worked on building it, with determination and consistency, faithful to the principle that such end justifies all means, including even the genocidal annihilation of the Serbs. The Croatian aspirations to territorial enlargement have a rather long history. Although small in numbers and in a small territory, the Croats have fostered great imperial ambitions. This may be well illustrated with the various names such as: "Alpine or mountainous Croats" (Slovenes), "Orthodox Croats" (Serbs), "indisputable Croats" or the "flower of the Croatian nation" (Muslims), "Turkish Croatia", "Red Croatia", "White Croatia" or "Carpathian Croatia", which were the territories of Bosnia, Montenegro, Dalmatia and Slovenia. These names have been carefully cherished and for centuries instilled in the consciousness of a Croat with the aim to develop the awareness of Croatia's greatness and the numerical strength of the Croats. With the present two studies, I wish to demonstrate and prove when, how, on what foundations and with what objectives the Croats have endeavoured, from the 1848/49 revolution until the present time, to get hold of some parts or the entire territories of Vojvodina and Bosnia and Herzegovina. As precious data on this topic are scattered in different places, it is hard to gain insight into the entirety of this national, state-legal and geopolitical issue. With this in mind, I have elaborated in these papers, in a chronological sequence, on all important Croatian territorial claims on Vojvodina and Bosnia and Herzegovina. I have thus practically uncovered the decades-long greater Croatian politics and have provided concrete answers to the Croatian attacks at Serbia and the Serbs in regard to the so-called greater Serbian politics. I would also like to inform readers that this book is the second, supplemented and expanded edition of the book first published in 2012 in small print run (500 copies) and sold out a long time ago. Belgrade, 20 July 2016 Vasilije Đ. Krestić ; Посебна издања / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 685. Председништво ; књ. 6