Suchergebnisse

In the introduction, the author analyses Clinton's approach to Europe and the European NATO allies, particularly his wish to develop the partnership and to expand the Alliance. The new post-cold-war relations in Europe contributed to the stronger American-European ties - the foundation of atlantism. This new model of relations is discussed in relation to the emerging challenges that pose the key questions: the creation of a new joint strategy, the problems of NATO's "out of area" interventions and the creation of such European relations that will not provoke uncalled-for Russian reactions. Seen within such a framework, NATO is going to remain the chief proponent of military-political actions of the developed world in which US is to play the leading role. (SOI : S. 102)

The original NATO strategy regarding Yugoslavia has, despite its military triumphs, proved deficient for achieving the planned political objectives. That is why the existing alliance strategy has been given up and replaced by a new one. This change of direction is under way; the success of NATO's entire military action hinges on its success, as do the relations on the Balkans and the future of NATO's new strategic concept designed in late April at the Washington summit. (SOI : S. 67)

The new security paradigm of the modern world, created in 1990s, led to a security organization of a number of countries of the former Soviet bloc. Also evolving, at varying pace, was the contractual relationship of collective security, which, due to the escalation of activities of extremist groups on the territory of Central Asia, the deterioration of Russia-NATO relations, as well as the emergence of the US military bases in the region, resulted in a decision to form the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) in 2002. The basic declared purpose of the organization is a desire of the signatory countries to increase the effectiveness of their cooperation in the field of security. Established as a typical military alliance with characteristics of multifunctional organization for securing peace, CSTO aspires to the role of a regional leading organization in the field of security cooperation, with many open questions concerning its functioning and future development. Whether the new security organization raises the level of collective security of its associate member countries, and whether the said organization contributes to the security of the region and the world, only time ahead will tell.

The maintenance of peace and stability in the post-cold-war world in the circumstances of cooperation and partnership requires an appropriate approach and manner of resolving the crises triggered off by the collapse of communist federations. Imperial policies and regimes must be eliminated while the process of the geopolitical consolidation and the creation of independent and sovereign states in Central and Eastern Europe (and in Euro-Asia on the whole), built around the democratic and market principles, must be wrapped up. The new political leaders (mostly leftist) in the countries that for over fifty years (and now through the Kosovo crisis) have been developing the trans-Atlantic alliance within the military-political framework of NATO (based on the same values, principles, and goals), are now developing appropriate strategies for the post-cold-war hotspots (based on the accumulated experiences). (SOI : S. 89) + The author analyses the process of democratisation of international relations and the future configuration of international order following the end of the era of bipolar confrontation and the establishment of cooperation in the world which has witnessed the change in the key actors' roles regarding their approach to the resolution of the post-cold-war crises which jeopardise the world's peace and stability. First, the author provides a short outline of the genesis of the evolution of the US foreign policy, from the end of World War II to the beginning of the cold war and the formation of NATO. He points out that today's agenda of the international order, its structures, interventionism, and use of force in achieving political objectives, were already shaped at that time. The suggestions put forward constituted the framework and the foundation for the world politics until the late 80s; the cumulative effect of these responses on today's attempts at solving post- cold-war crises enables us to evaluate the roles and behaviour of individual actors in the resolution of the Kosovo crisis

Predmet istraživanja u ovom radu je izgradnja identiteta NATO, koji danas sebe određuje kao političko-vojnu organizaciju i već šest i po decenija, ponekad i presudno, utiče na međunarodne odnose i bezbednosne procese u svetu. Cilj rada je da se na osnovu teorijske i praktične deskripcije i analize procesa konstituisanja identiteta NATO, uočavanjem različitih dometa pojedinih teorija međunarodnih odnosa i studija bezbednosti u opisivanju, objašnjenju i prognoziranju društvenih pojava i uloge Alijanse u njihovom oblikovanju, pokaže dostignuti nivo izgradnje činilaca identiteta NATO. Da bi se odgovorilo ovom zadatku, u prvom poglavlju izlažu se osnovni koncepti identiteta i bezbednosti kao ključnih kategorija, koje se posmatraju u dinamičnom uzajamnom odnosu, smisao dobijaju društvenom konstrukcijom i proizvodnjom značenja, socijalno su uslovljene i promenljive zavisno od konteksta. U drugom poglavlju izlažu se stavovi tri uticajne teorije međunarodnih odnosa: realizma, liberalizma i socijalnog konstruktivizma, o karakteru, ulozi i budućnosti NATO. U trećem i četvrtom poglavlju, teorijski uvidi iz prva dva poglavlja primenjuju se u studiji slučaja izgradnje identiteta NATO posle Hladnog rata, a težište analize je na promenama karaktera bezbednosnih pretnji i odgovorima NATO koji se opredeljuje za širenje i vojno delovanje izvan svoje teritorije. Peto poglavlje posvećeno je analizi činilaca identiteta NATO: političkog jedinstva, vojnih sposobnosti, razvijene institucionalne infrastrukture i nove bezbednosne kulture. Zbirnim delovanjem grade NATO, koji u novom multipolarnom nadmetanju za raspodelu moći i kontrolu resursa i teritorija, predvođen najjačom silom – SAD, nastoji da spreči opadanje, sačuva i unapredi dostignutu moć i uticaj. ; This paper studies building the identity of NATO, which now defines itself as a politico-military organization and, for the past six and a half decades, has had, sometimes decisive, influence over the international relations and security processes in the world. The aim of this paper is to show the achieved level of building the NATO identity factors, on the basis of theoretical and practical description and analysis of the process of NATO identity constitution, noticing different range of certain theories of international relations and security studies in describing, explaining and forecasting of social phenomena and the role of the Alliance in their design. In order to accomplish this task, the first chapter addresses the basic concepts of identity and security as key categories, which are viewed in a dynamic correlation, receiving its meaning through social construction and production of meanings, are socially conditioned and variable depending on the context. The second chapter presents the views of three prominent theories of international relations: realism, liberalism and social constructivism, the character, the role and future of NATO. In the third and the fourth chapter, the theoretical insights from the first two chapters are applied in the case study of building NATO identity after the Cold War, and the focus of the analysis is on changing the character of security threats and responses of NATO which opts for the expansion and military action outside its territory. The fifth chapter is devoted to the analysis of NATO identity factors: political unity, military capabilities, developed institutional infrastructure and new security culture; their aggregate action builds NATO, which, in the new multipolar competition for the distribution of power and control of resources and territories, led by the strongest power – the United States, seeks to prevent degradation, preserve and improve the achieved power and influence.

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.

The issue of security in the new social and political context has not stopped attracting the attention of strategic security studies, this time with the emphasis on contemporary concepts in response to non-military security issues, such as demographic changes or environmental degradation. It is obvious that we live in a world of fundamental political and economic changes in relations between states and non-state actors. Instability, military threats and conflicts are back in the focus of security policy, although in a completely new way that requires new understanding and a new attitude towards these categories, as well as a new response from the state and especially from the international community towards these kinds of threats or the use of force in a post-Cold-War order. In order to create a system in which all countries can function under the same rules, act in accordance with them and react in certain situations in compliance with those rules, it was necessary to create a single system of collective security. This system is a good basis for all countries to react according to the same rules and standards in certain situations when their safety is compromised. Integration processes and collective security are constants of a modern society and every country seeks to become a part of a specific system, whether it be a security-based, political or economic framework of integration. The main factor that was very important for the member states of NATO was the disappearance of the key danger coming from the East in the form of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. On the other hand, the issue of NATO's existence and future arose, as did the issue of justifying its existence, bearing in mind the absence of threats and enemies that might jeopardize the Western world. Academia and a number of scholars believed that NATO would cease to exist. For them the existence of such an alliance no longer made any sense, and they thought that it would be best for all the member states to stop being a part of such an Alliance. vi By the Declaration of Independence adopted by Parliament on June 3, 2006, Montenegro clearly committed itself to Euro-Atlantic Integration. Montenegro's membership of NATO and the EU is one of the foreign policy priorities of the Government of Montenegro. At a time when all South-East European countries are included in the Euro-Atlantic integration process, Montenegro's commitment to becoming a part of the regional and international security system (UN, NATO, EU, and OSCE) is a realistic and the best solution for achieving long-lasting stability and prosperity in the region. Montenegro's strategic goal is to build a modern and functional security system that has the ability to respond in the most efficient manner to the challenges, risks and threats to the state. For every country, the Constitution is the basis of its future path towards the democratization of the society and membership of international organizations. As the supreme law of the country, it is necessary to include all the standards that will clearly indicate the commitment of the state to the direction it wants to go, how it will develop, and which principles related to human rights and freedoms it must have. The Constitution of Montenegro does not question in any of its parts Montenegro's commitment towards membership of NATO and the EU. This is very important not only from a constitutional point of view, but also from the point of view of the international standards and norms that apply in other countries and represent the democratic standards of developed countries. Also, in this way Montenegro as a country demonstrates that despite any possible change of government it will remain committed to the European and Euro-Atlantic integration processes. At this moment, this determination is very important, bearing in mind all other aspects that could potentially affect Montenegro's path towards the Euro-Atlantic family. Consideration of the changing security environment in Europe and worldwide, as well as the improvement of the security situation by a number of Eastern European countries entering the EU and NATO, which inter alia required a reform of their defense systems in accordance with NATO standards, raises the issue of the future use of the defense capacities of Montenegro. ; The issue of security in the new social and political context has not stopped attracting the attention of strategic security studies, this time with the emphasis on contemporary concepts in response to non-military security issues, such as demographic changes or environmental degradation. It is obvious that we live in a world of fundamental political and economic changes in relations between states and non-state actors. Instability, military threats and conflicts are back in the focus of security policy, although in a completely new way that requires new understanding and a new attitude towards these categories, as well as a new response from the state and especially from the international community towards these kinds of threats or the use of force in a post-Cold-War order. In order to create a system in which all countries can function under the same rules, act in accordance with them and react in certain situations in compliance with those rules, it was necessary to create a single system of collective security. This system is a good basis for all countries to react according to the same rules and standards in certain situations when their safety is compromised. Integration processes and collective security are constants of a modern society and every country seeks to become a part of a specific system, whether it be a security-based, political or economic framework of integration. The main factor that was very important for the member states of NATO was the disappearance of the key danger coming from the East in the form of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. On the other hand, the issue of NATO's existence and future arose, as did the issue of justifying its existence, bearing in mind the absence of threats and enemies that might jeopardize the Western world. Academia and a number of scholars believed that NATO would cease to exist. For them the existence of such an alliance no longer made any sense, and they thought that it would be best for all the member states to stop being a part of such an Alliance. vi By the Declaration of Independence adopted by Parliament on June 3, 2006, Montenegro clearly committed itself to Euro-Atlantic Integration. Montenegro's membership of NATO and the EU is one of the foreign policy priorities of the Government of Montenegro. At a time when all South-East European countries are included in the Euro-Atlantic integration process, Montenegro's commitment to becoming a part of the regional and international security system (UN, NATO, EU, and OSCE) is a realistic and the best solution for achieving long-lasting stability and prosperity in the region. Montenegro's strategic goal is to build a modern and functional security system that has the ability to respond in the most efficient manner to the challenges, risks and threats to the state. For every country, the Constitution is the basis of its future path towards the democratization of the society and membership of international organizations. As the supreme law of the country, it is necessary to include all the standards that will clearly indicate the commitment of the state to the direction it wants to go, how it will develop, and which principles related to human rights and freedoms it must have. The Constitution of Montenegro does not question in any of its parts Montenegro's commitment towards membership of NATO and the EU. This is very important not only from a constitutional point of view, but also from the point of view of the international standards and norms that apply in other countries and represent the democratic standards of developed countries. Also, in this way Montenegro as a country demonstrates that despite any possible change of government it will remain committed to the European and Euro-Atlantic integration processes. At this moment, this determination is very important, bearing in mind all other aspects that could potentially affect Montenegro's path towards the Euro-Atlantic family. Consideration of the changing security environment in Europe and worldwide, as well as the improvement of the security situation by a number of Eastern European countries entering the EU and NATO, which inter alia required a reform of their defense systems in accordance with NATO standards, raises the issue of the future use of the defense capacities of Montenegro.

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.

Starting from the belief that there is a very high level of interdependence between countries and regions in the modern world, that is indivisibility of security at a global level, the Republic of Serbia, acting on its foreign policy plan, advocates affirmation of cooperative security concept. Considering the fact that development of cooperation at a bilateral and multilateral level can significantly contribute to national security, it advocates strengthening of the role of the UN as the world organization, getting the status of the EU member and active participation in the NATO programme "Partnership for Peace", taking into account the opinion on neutrality of the country in relation to the existing military alliances. During the previous decade (particularly the last couple of years) the expansion in terms of the Serbian Armed Forces engagement in multinational operations has been obvious. In addition to a significant increase in the number of the engaged Ministry of Defence and Serbian Armed Forces personnel, the engagement framework has been expanded – besides the UN missions our country participates in the EU multinational operations, as well. As one of the founders of the Non-Aligned Movement, in the condition of the world division into blocs, Yugoslavia was rather noticeable among the UN members due to its participation in peacekeeping missions, thus giving a concrete contribution to peacekeeping in the world. In the changed international circumstances after the Cold War, the nature of conflicts in the world has largely changed (the focus of conflicts has been transferred from intercountry to a level of intracountry conflicts), and the way of their resolution, as well. Following the tradition of participation in the UN peacekeeping operations, our country gives a significant contribution to contemporary multidimensional operations. ; Полазећи од уверења да у савременом свету постоји изузетно висок ниво узајамне зависности држава и региона, односно недељивост безбедности на глобалном нивоу, Република Србија се у свом деловању на спољнополитичком плану залаже за афирмацију концепта кооперативне безбедности. Сматрајући да се развијањем процеса сарадње на билатералном и мултилатералном плану може знатно допринети националној безбедности, залаже се за јачање улоге Уједињених нација као светске организације, добијање статуса чланице Европске уније и активно учешће у програму НАТО "Партнерство за мир", уз став о неутралности земље у односу на постојеће војне савезе. Током претходне деценије (нарочито последњих неколико година) евидентна је експанзија у погледу употребе Војске Србије у мултинационалним операцијама. Уз изузетно повећање броја ангажованих припадника Министарства одбране и Војске Србије, проширен је и оквир деловања – поред мисија Уједињених нација наша земља учествује и у мултинационалним операцијама Европске уније. Као један од оснивача Покрета несврстаних земаља, у условима блоковске поделе света, Југославија је међу чланицама Уједињених нација била веома запажена због свог учешћа у мировним мисијама, чиме је давала конкретан допринос очувању мира у свету. У измењеним међународним околностима након "хладног рата", природа сукоба у свету се битно променила (са међудржавног, тежиште сукоба је померено на ниво унутар држава), а самим тим и начин њиховог решавања. Настављајући традицију учешћа у мировним операцијама Уједињених нација, наша земља даје знатан допринос савременим мултидимензионалним операцијама.