Part One

Author(s): Dušan Lazić,Philipp Fluri,Milorad Timotić,Vladimir Rukavishnikov / Language(s): Serbian Publication Year: 0

The cooperation between the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) and NATO evolved significantly over time, reflecting changes in regional and international dynamics. Initially, during the Cold War, Yugoslavia served as a buffer between NATO and the Warsaw Pact, but formal relations with NATO were minimal. With the end of the Cold War, NATO shifted its focus to peacekeeping and stability missions in Southeastern Europe, particularly in areas of the former Yugoslavia such as Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, and Macedonia.

Part Two

Author(s): Michael Pugh,Marc Houben,Vojin Dimitrijević,Radoslav Stojanović / Language(s): English Publication Year: 0

Democratic associations of civil society can play a transformative role in changing existing mentalities. This need not be limited to budgetary and performance oversight, but could include development of structures and regulations. The role of civil society groups would also be to mediate and translate security issues between the wider society and the defence establishment. They can make military questions meaningful to society and echo social concerns to the defence establishment. Such a transfer of knowledge can also occur by other means: official statements, military press briefings, and the election of parliamentarians with an interest in security matters. But official statements are only the beginning of dialogue, press briefings can be easily manipulated and parliamentarians are elected only every few years and do not usually devote much time to defence issues (except, importantly, through standing committees).

Part Three

Author(s): Vladimir Goati,Miroslav Hadžić,Mile Stojković,Zlatan Jeremić / Language(s): Serbian Publication Year: 0

The Serbian opposition struggled with internal divisions and short-lived coalitions, enabling Slobodan Milošević to maintain power. The 1996 "Together" coalition briefly succeeded in winning local elections but quickly disbanded due to internal discord. Subsequent efforts at unity, such as the "Alliance for Changes" (1998) and the "Democratic Opposition of Serbia" (DOS, 2000), culminated in the landmark September 2000 elections. DOS's Vojislav Koštunica won the presidency, defeating Milošević, despite attempts at election fraud.

South Eastern Europe: A Common History in Brief

Author(s): Živorad Kovačević,Meghan Simpson,Radomir Šovljanski / Language(s): English Publication Year: 0

There used to be a clever description of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) that indicated all of its complexity: one country, two scripts (Cyrillic and Latin); three basic religions (Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and Islam), four languages (Serbian, Croatian, Slovenian, and Macedonian); five major nationalities (Serbs, Croats, Slovenians, Macedonians, and Bosniaks) and several smaller national groups (Albanians, Hungarians, Turks, Roma, etc.); six Socialist Republics (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia), with seven neighbors (Italy, Austria, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, and Albania); and eight constitutive parts (six Socialist Republics and two Autonomous Provinces—Vojvodina and Kosovo). A history of the territory of South Eastern Europe might be best summed up in terms of the constant flow of populations and changing regimes. In the center of what came to be the SRFY, across Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia, there stretched a line separating the Western and Eastern Roman Empire (later known as Byzantium); Roman Catholic and Orthodox religions (after the schism in 1054); the Habsburg and Ottoman Empires; the West and the East. While Yugoslavia’s name was supposed to indicate that it was the country of the Southern Slavs, in fact, it was composed of significant nonSlav minorities—among them, the largest in number being Albanians, Hungarians, and Germans—who had also inhabited the region for centuries. The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, established in 1946 (as the Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia), was a socialist state and not an actual democracy. Though leadership in Belgrade wielded a significant amount of control over all the Republics, the country was much more liberal domestically and more open to the world than other countries of the Eastern Bloc. For much of the socialist period, particularly from the 1960s, it enjoyed high living standards and access to international markets. When the SFRY refused to accept Soviet hegemony in 1948, it became, according to Warren Zimmerman, the last Ambassador of the United States to the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the “protected and sometimes pampered child of American and Western diplomacy.”

Alliances and Institution Building - Introduction

Author(s): Aleksandar Popov / Language(s): English Publication Year: 0

The first part of this book tells the story of a group of actors who have worked for the normalization of turbulent relations, stability, and the entrenchment of democracy in South Eastern Europe. This story begins with the Center for Regionalism (Centar za Regionalizm) that, since its establishment in October 1998, has played an important role in creating a favorable environment for cooperation within and across communities, cities, and regions of the former Yugoslavia. The Center has been involved in several initiatives that have had far-reaching effects, from the local to interregional levels

The Association of Multiethnic Cities of South Eastern Europe–Philia

Author(s): Jovan Komšić / Language(s): English Publication Year: 0

This chapter introduces the work the Association of Multiethnic Cities of South Eastern Europe–Philia in the decade and a half since the cessation of hostilities in the former Yugoslavia. Growing from its origins as a civil movement and a loose network of activists to an association that now encompasses over 60 communities across Central and South Eastern Europe, Philia works to better trade, diplomacy and relations among its members and the wider region. Facing a particularly daunting task of overcoming mutual hatred and distrust that were prevalent in the results of many public opinion polls after the war, the founders of the Association relied on their prewar contacts to begin to lay the ground for reconciliation and the first few signals of a possible normalization of cross-border relations. Established on the basis of human rights and good governance, Philia has focused on supporting democracy and peace-building at local levels. Its most important requisite for any city’s membership has been the endorsement of the Agreement on Interethnic Tolerance, a document designed to foster and protect European standards of fundamental freedoms and national minority rights, as well as compulsory partnership with a local nongovernmental organization. This bottom-up initiative, driven by its founding members from its general secretariat in Novi Sad, works to reestablish cross-border communication and cooperation through municipal triangles of cooperation. Upholding the principles of free will, autonomy, openness, transparency, respect and consensus, Philia, for instance, does not shy away from promoting the potentially controversial use of minority languages in private and public life, while reaching out to a broad spectrum of interest groups, whether businesses, schools, chambers of commerce, universities or local elected and public officials. Organized around a number of initiatives and public campaigns for civic engagement, Philia members are pragmatic and do not insist that every member take part in every initiative, realizing that these steps are gradual and need time to mature. Through an array of seminars, training courses, capacity development, city diplomacy, research, small grants, campaigns, and alliances with other like-minded pro-European civic organizations, Philia has significantly contributed to interregional dialogue.

City Triangles in South Eastern Europe

Author(s): Gábor Péteri / Language(s): English Publication Year: 0

This introductory chapter on city triangles in South Eastern Europe discusses how, despite the legacy and consequences of the Balkan wars of the 1990s, these cities managed to formalize their contacts in order to resolve their common problems and to remain home to ethnically diverse and recently divided populations. These city triangles handled relatively soft issues like cultural and sporting events, while also tackling issues like business development and questions of water supply. Their attempts at regional cooperation and diplomacy fluctuated in intensity, as political instability in the aftermath of the war often was an impediment to accomplishing much change. Local leaders had to find their local counterparts across what had most recently been a hostile border, while also seeking allies at the national level, more often than not a source of obstruction on the part of politicians and the central bureaucracy. Upon signing the Agreement on Interethnic Tolerance, local leaders were obliged to consider the prospects for concrete cooperation with one another. The struggle to develop, implement and reestablish diplomacy, trade and cooperation indicates that the process of cooperation is as important as the results, whereby citizens come to realize that it is possible to return to peaceful coexistence. The backbone of this effort has been the work of NGOs and a few particularly dedicated individuals to reestablish and continue the ties broken by war between regional cities of the former Yugoslavia. Designed to allow NGOs in member cities to maintain cooperation, even if political circumstances may prevent the respective city administrations from doing so, these triangles have been important channels for keeping communication open and achieving their goals as the nearest opportunity. The first triangle established among Baja, Osijek, and Sombor in 1999 has since been the model for more cooperation among cities in the greater region. Far from their respective capitals, these border cities often have suffered from a dramatic economic decline due to the newly-erected borders and barriers to trade and dialogue and solving common problems like fire protection, waste disposal, water supply, minority rights, or promoting tourism and local economic development. Sustained so far by ambitions to join the European Union and supported under the Instruments of Pre-Accession (IPA), the future for city triangle diplomacy is bright, so long as the incentives remain to forget the hostilities of the past.

Triangle of Cooperation: Tuzla, Osijek, and Novi Sad

Author(s): Aleksandar Popov / Language(s): English Publication Year: 0

The towns of Tuzla (Bosnia and Herzegovina), Osijek (Croatia), and Novi Sad (Serbia) belong to a common geographic, economic, and cultural area. As part of Yugoslavia, they enjoyed a high level of cooperation in all fields. With the collapse of Yugoslavia and the wars waged in the region, cooperation and communication among the towns ceased. Regional NGOs—the Center for Regionalism of Novi Sad, partner organizations from Tuzla, and the Center for Peace, Non-Violence, and Human Rights from Osijek—made efforts in the late 1990s and early 2000s to restore cooperation among the three towns. These efforts bore fruit, and on January 21, 2002 in Tuzla, the three mayors and directors of three NGOs from each town took part in a ceremony, signing the Agreement on Interethnic Tolerance. This agreement became the basis for the renewal of cooperation among the three municipalities. The values of the agreement were operationalized in a range of joint efforts in areas of economics and business, ecology, information and technology, sports, and education, among others. The restored cooperation among the three towns has made significant contributions to overcoming deep, postwar psychological barriers. It became a model on the basis of which new triangles or circles of cooperation of towns would later be formed, leading to the formalization of the Association of Multiethnic Cities of South Eastern Europe–Philia.

Truth, Responsibility, and Reconciliation: Bajina Bašta and Srebrenica

Author(s): Boban Tomić / Language(s): English Publication Year: 0

Bajina Bašta, a municipality in Serbia, and Srebrenica, a municipality in Bosnia and Herzegovina, are divided, or linked, by the Drina River. Cooperation between these two municipalities while part of the former Yugoslav federation was extremely good, including a high level of interaction in economic areas. During the wars of the 1990s, an estimated 7,000 civilians were massacred in a few days in July 1995 in Srebrenica. A site of one of the greatest crimes against humanity since the Second World War, the town became a symbol of suffering. Srebrenica was in fact shelled from the territory of Bajina Bašta municipality—more precisely, from the slopes of Mount Tara in Serbia. Thus, many in Srebrencia have resisted renewing cooperation with their neighbors after the cessation of the war. However, seeking to overcome recent tragedies, local civic organizations took the lead in rebuilding ties. In 2005, upon the initiative of Agora, an NGO from Bajina Bašta, and the Center for Regionalism, from Novi Sad, representatives of the two municipalities—including local officials and NGOs—signed an Agreement on Interethnic Tolerance. This agreement served as the basis for reestablishing intermunicipal cooperation in a range of areas, based on principles of tolerance and trust. Among the most important cross-border initiatives has been the creation of a Cross-border Development Agency, which has built strong economic links between the two municipalities as well as with neighboring municipalities on both sides of the Drina River. The renewal of economic cooperation has been a crucial step in dismantling rigid barriers that were created during the war.

Cross-border Neighborhood Program: Baja, Sombor, and Osijek

Author(s): Gojko Mišković / Language(s): English Publication Year: 0

This chapter presents intermunicipal cooperation among the cities of Sombor, located in Vojvodina, northern Serbia, Baja, in southwestern Hungary, and Osijek, in western Croatia. Despite political divisions, these cities have shared a long and common history, which has been shaped dramatically during the last century. Despite being located in different countries, cross-border engagement continued throughout the socialist period. At certain points, central governments pro-actively established mechanisms to support inter-city cooperation, with the aims to promote peaceful relations between neighbors, manage common resources, and enhance “socialist development” and partnership. However, with the collapse of Yugoslavia and socialist regime in Hungary, the onset of war, the hardening of ethno-national divisions, and new political borders, tensions in the region became rife. War broke out between Serbia and Croatia, and thousands of refugees flooded into Hungary. Meanwhile, the situation of the large ethnic Hungarian minority in northern Serbia of Vojvodina became a politically sensitive issue that influenced Hungary’s stance towards Yugoslavia’s demise. Rebuilding communication has been a fraught process that has depended on a range of factors, including the courage of a number of individuals and the active participation of local citizens in shaping their local governments’ policies and stances. Additionally, the Center for Regionalism and Philia played an important role in channeling the “good will” of citizens and municipal leaders into concrete actions and mechanisms. The Agreement on Interethnic Tolerance provided a framework and atmosphere that allowed for and accelerated concrete cooperation between Baja and Sombor. Sombor and Osijek, as founding members of Philia, were among the first cities in the wider South Eastern European region to initiate and rebuild cross-border cooperation. Despite a recent history of war and the different interests of their national governments, these cities have worked together to build infrastructure, engage in cultural exchanges, facilitate economic development, and promote democratic governance in their shared region.

Local Cooperation in the South Adriatic Region

Author(s): Živorad Kovačević / Language(s): English Publication Year: 0

The South Adriatic region exemplifies the difficulties that national and local governments and local communities have faced in overcoming the effects of the dissolution of Yugoslavia and the violence that characterized much of the 1990s. This chapter presents the initiative to establish a triangle of cooperation among the neighboring cities of Dubrovnik in southern Croatia, Trebinje in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Herceg Novi in Montenegro. The region in which these cities are located is one that is ethnically or denominationally diverse. However, the cities in these regions share not only a recent past, but also common infrastructure, public services, and natural resources. New borders since the dissolution of Yugoslavia have created immense obstacles for local populations, in terms of visiting relatives, traveling to work, accessing schools and employment, and managing shared resources like water. While Dubrovnik, Trebinje, and Herceg Novi differ in numerous ways, such as in terms of economic indicators and their population size, they continue to be interdependent. For local governments, the effective management of issues like water management, tourism, waste disposal and fire protection depended upon intermunicipal agreement. In 2001, at its fourth session held in Dubrovnik in October, the Igman Initiative, launched an effort to establish a new triangle of cooperation among these cities. The idea was to rebuild cooperation among local authorities, enterprises, and communities that continued to suffer as a result of the recent was in their region. While there was interest and demand in these cities to cooperate, their particular set of challenges surpassed the capacities of local government and NGOs. Cooperation in the region has necessitated the role of central governments. That is, one particularly important aspect of intermunicipal cooperation in this interconnected region was the need to work with central governments on issues like responding to fires and managing scare water resources. The Center for Regionalism, the Igman Initiative, and Philia have played a pivotal role in improving intermunicipal cooperation in this region.

Activities of the Fund for an Open Society–Serbia and the Center for Regionalism

Author(s): Tomislav Žigmanov / Language(s): English Publication Year: 0

This last chapter provides an overview of a three-year-long project of the Fund for an Open Society–Serbia to develop and reach a morally-sustainable and ethno-culturally sensitive model of governance in multiethnic local communities in Serbia. It was implemented by three different local self-governments (Senta, Sombor, and Zrenjanin) in Vojvodina, in cooperation with the Center for Regionalism from Novi Sad and a group of experts engaged to assist with the project. The project began with an in-depth analysis of the existing status of local minority policies. The results were later the subjects of public discussions held in each local community. This was followed by a number of activities aimed at developing the capacities of local authorities and minority institutions and organizations for the creation and implementation of minority policies at the local level by means of education (round tables, consultations, organized trainings, and study tours). The target groups of these activities were the elected and appointed representatives of local, regional, and central administrative authorities, representatives of local minority institutions and NGOs, cultural and educational institutions, the media, etc. At the same time, various activities were undertaken in order to establish good models for minority policies in local communities. In this respect, the concrete problems and existing needs in given local communities first were defined, followed by the planned creation of the most adequate and optimal solutions, which had to observe the legal framework, interests, and needs of each particular minority community, as well as realistic possibilities for the local community concerned. Finally, the initiatives were defined, along with the manners of their articulation (models, procedures, system, etc.), which was followed by the implementation of the initiatives as one of the ways of resolving the problems.

ANALIZA RADA NACIONALNOG SAVETA BUGARSKE NACIONALNE MANJINE

Author(s): Nikola Konstantinović / Language(s): Serbian Publication Year: 0

ANALIZA RADA NACIONALNOG SAVETA MAĐARSKE NACIONALNE MANJINE

Author(s): Agneš Ćurčić Asodi / Language(s): Serbian Publication Year: 0

Analiza rada Nacionalnog saveta romske nacionalne manjine

Author(s): Danilo Rakić / Language(s): Serbian Publication Year: 0

Analiza rada Nacionalnog saveta rumunske nacionalne manjine

Author(s): Tatjana Tucić / Language(s): Serbian Publication Year: 0

Analiza rada Nacionalnog saveta slovačke nacionalne manjine

Author(s): Jelena Perković / Language(s): Serbian Publication Year: 0

Standardi transparentnosti

Author(s): Tatjana Pavlović-Križanić / Language(s): Serbian Publication Year: 0

INTERNATIONAL SECURITY ORGANIZATIONS WITH AN INFERIOR HIERARCHICAL NATURE

Author(s): Victoria Arhiliuc,Nicolae Coșleț / Language(s): English Publication Year: 0

International organizations occupy an important place in the world system, are in large numbers [1], are classified into various typologies, and have a wide range of research and analysis. In this context, a special place is occupied by international security organizations in which a certain hierarchy is highlighted. The prominent position is on international collective security organizations of major importance, such as the United Nations, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the Collective Security Treaty Organization, which have a well-defined status that includes a stated purpose in the field of collective security, a wide space for the manifestation of competence, and a considerable number of participating members. At the same time, there are international security organizations of an inferior hierarchical nature or security organizations of secondary importance [2]. Although such organizations have a stated purpose in the field of security and cover a considerable geographical area, they do not occupy a decisive place in the world system, do not refer to the category of collective security organizations themselves, have a lower hierarchical character in relation to the concept of Collective Security, having an important role mainly in the regional level. This category includes: The Organization of American States (OAS), The African Union (AU), The League of Arab States (LAS), The Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), etc. [3].

Томос 19 – матрица за вселенски разкол

Author(s): Vasilianna Merheb / Language(s): Bulgarian Publication Year: 0

The paper sets out the main highlights of the analysis of the disastrous consequences of the non-canonical granting of “autocephaly” to the schismatic „Orthodox Church of Ukraine“ (OCU) by patriarch Bartholomew through the unilateral and anti-Conciliar issuance of a „Tomos“ in 2019 against the will of the Ukrainian Orthodox people. This predetermines „Tomos'19“ as a destructive matrix for ecumenical schism aimed at subordination of all local autocephalous Churches to the Fener in favor of realization of georeligious goals. Further, the process of creation of the geopolitical structure OCU, possessing all the features of an authoritarian ucrofascist sect, as a result of the tripartite collaboration between the USA, patriarch Bartholomew and former Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko, is outlined. In addition, the results of the fake „Tomos'19“ are described as poisonous fruits on the territory of Ukraine – the series of repressions against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church – Moscow Patriarchate – and in the local Orthodox Churches, the majority of which do not allow the recognition of the OCU. The article examines the repercussions of the situation on the Bulgarian Orthodox Church (BOC), tracing some of the antichurch processes in Bulgaria after the production of „Tomos 19“, with a focus on the serious danger of schism after the concelebration of three Bulgarian metropolitans and two bishops with schismatics from the OCU, which in its own way is a serious anti-state and anti-church diversion. In the end, the main conclusion is the necessity of convening an All-Orthodox Council to break the trap of the series of grave violations of patriarch Bartholomew, and in particular in the BOC to initiate the convening of a Church-People's Council to decide on the canonical punishment of the specific hierarchs who broke the rules if they do not renounce these actions and repent.