Search Results

Edward A. Freeman travelled extensively throughout his life and was far from being a sedentary gentleman-scholar confined to his country residence at Somerleaze, Somerset. According to Freeman, the successful historian needed to see the places about which he wrote. His historical travels took him to all parts of Europe, into North Africa and to the United States. Freeman’s foreign tours were carefully organised and conducted with the central purpose of informing and guiding his historical work. Over many years, Freeman developed a methodology for his historical travels that he seems to have applied consistently. On occasion, his travels took him into dangerous regions, such as Dalmatia in the late 1870s. Edward Freeman’s travels reflected his interest in historical geography and his recognition of the importance of place in the study of the past marks him out as one of the pioneers of the so-called ‘spatial turn’ in modern historiography.

The first part of the chapter gives a brief account of the bloody fratricidal war fought in Croatia and Bosnia‐Herzegovina in 1991–5, which resulted from ethnic nationalistic revolutions aimed at destroying the multiethnic federation of Yugoslavia founded by the communists, and establishing independent homogeneous states. Further wars would continue in 1998 (between the Serbs and Albanians in Kosovo) and in 2001 (between Albanians and Macedonians in Macedonia). The main part of the chapter discusses religion and nationalism in these successor states – Islam and Muslim nationalism in Bosnia‐Herzegovina, Catholicism (the Madonna of Medjugorje) and Croatian nationalism in Bosnia‐Herzegovina and Croatia, and the Orthodox Church in Serbia (and Kosovo), Macedonia, and Montenegro. The remaining two sections of the chapter discuss saint making in Croatia in the late 1990s, and the role of religious organizations in the international peace process.

The role of the Serbian Orthodox Church during the years of the communist federation of Yugoslavia is discussed in the context of Tito's suppression of Serbian secular nationalism, which in the end led to an upsurge of clerical nationalism that would during the last two decades of Yugoslavia's life successfully appropriate and virtually monopolize ethnic nationalist causes. Among the events covered in the chapter are the rise of Serbian ethnic nationalism, the rise of Albanian ethnic nationalism in Kosovo, the seeking of independence from the Serbian Orthodox Church by the Macedonian and Montenegrin branches of that Church, and the schism in the North American branch of the Serbian Church. Surveys of religiosity in the Catholic, Muslim, and Orthodox communities in the 1960s are also reported and relations between the Russian and Serbian Orthodox Churches discussed.

The chapter starts with a brief account of Albanian anti‐Serbian activities (attacks on Serbian sacred places and monuments, said to be fuelled by religious hatred) in Kosovo in the 1980s. It then goes on to discuss shrines as a powerful symbolic energizer to the Serbian nationalist movement of the 1980s, with accounts of the building of the new cathedral in Belgrade, and notes on the construction of Serbian churches in Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia, Montenegro, and Kosovo. Next an account is given of the Milošević era, including his initial pacification of Kosovo (which enabled more restoration and building of Serbian sacred sites, and a program of pilgrimages, jubilees, etc.) and his pilgrimage to the thirteenth‐century Hilandar monastery at the holy mountain of Athos in Greece, which paved the way for a new role of the Serbian Orthodox Church in the Serbian nationalist movement.

Disraeli's position was weakened by the entry of Serbia and Montenegro into the war against the Ottoman Empire, and especially by the Bulgarian atrocities and the start of the Bulgarian agitation. The resistance of public opinion tied his hands and prevented him from pursuing policies based on decisive moves and sabre‐rattling. Although a significant proportion of public opinion believed that Disraeli was prepared to go to war in the interests of the Ottoman Empire, he was also prepared to take part in its division, provided that Britain's prestige remained intact and that it be given possession of Constantinople together with some other strongholds. The Bulgarian agitation shook him, yet every time that he yielded ground he tried to cover this up with provocative speeches. At the same time, Russia's support for Serbia and Montenegro and her public interest in Bulgaria convinced him that she was his main opponent.

This chapter assesses the EU's impact and effectiveness in promoting peacemaking in its neighbourhood through its contractual relations with conflict parties. It does so by focusing on five conflicts in the European neighbourhood: the conflicts in Cyprus, Turkey (and the Kurds), Serbia and Montenegro, Israel-Palestine, and Georgia (Abkhazia and South Ossetia). It establishes three ‘channels of influence’ through which, in the context of contractual relations, the EU may impact on these neighbourhood conflicts. The first is conditionality (both positive and negative); the second is social learning; and the third channel of influence is termed passive enforcement. It is argued that the process of experiential learning which passive enforcement implies gives rise to a subtler process of influence and change than conditionality, and may be perceived as less of an external imposition, embedded as it is in legal commitments voluntarily undertaken.

This chapter discusses international intervention in Yugoslavia in the 1990s. The most important types of foreign intervention in the case of Yugoslavia have been recognition of independence, mediation, peacekeeping (including peace enforcement and peace building), military intervention, sanctions, and humanitarian assistance. The following aspects of international intervention are explored in more detail: (a) the recognition policy (focusing on policy formulation of the main actors, namely EC member states and the United States of America); (b) mediation, with a focus on territorial settlement and peoples' rights in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina; (c) military intervention in Serbia and Montenegro in 1999.

This chapter begins with a brief history of the idea of succession, laying out the changing shape of legal discourse in the period prior to the project of codification in the 1960s. It then examines several features of the discourse as it developed during that time to identify the main theoretical, conceptual, and analytical ‘moves’ that have assisted in the formation of this particular field of international law, with a view to bringing to the forefront some of the quandaries that have tended to be ill-articulated in mainstream accounts. Some of the general ‘themes’ that appear to underpin approaches to the question of succession are discussed such as the differentiation between ‘de iure’ and ‘de facto’ succession and between ‘state continuity’ and ‘state succession’.

This chapter analyses the complex language situation in Montenegro, focusing on the dialects and literary traditions, the debates surrounding the official language of Montenegro, and the characteristics of a separate Montenegrin language. The sociolinguistics of dialect geography and the literary traditions in Montenegro are described. The chapter also discusses the features of Montenegro's two factions, the neo-Vukovites and Nikcevic and his supporters. The merits of a proposed standard, including its new letters and new pronunciations and the expansion of ijekavian features, are shown. The future path of the Montenegrin language remains uncertain, and it is still unclear if and to what extent it will be accepted outside Montenegro's borders.

This chapter discusses developments since 2004, including scholarly attitudes towards the new language realities in ex-Yugoslavia, a round table controversy in Croatia, two new dictionaries in Bosnia-Herzegovina, the pains of language separation in Montenegro, and recent perspectives in Serbia. Updates on corpus and status planning issues affecting the development of Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, and Serbian languages are provided. The most recent publications and scholarly efforts defining similarities and differences among the languages that used to be subsumed under 'Serbo-Croatian’ are explained. The chapter ends with the book's final observations and suggestions for future research.

This chapter examines the history of the fall of the Ottoman Empire. It discusses the Young Turks' Revolution, the extirpation of the Muslims, and the depopulation of the Empire due to military losses during the Balkan Wars. The chapter describes how Bulgaria, Serbia, Greece, and Montenegro took advantage of the turbulence in Istanbul to launch a combined attack on what was left of the Ottoman domain in southeastern Europe.

This chapter argues that the relationship between the woman question and women's everyday lives took on new meaning in the eighteenth century with the creation of a larger reading public and wider arenas of public debate. This is exemplified in the intense debates on women and society in Spain in the 1720s and 1730s, particularly the discussion of the question of female equality spurred by the 1726 publication of Fray Benito Jerónimo Feijoo y Montenegro's Defense of Women. This renewed and widespread attention to the woman question paralleled contemporary discussions in other parts of western Europe.

Some compositions of this period emerged from an inscrutable, sheltered corner of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky's mind, while most were affected by what he called “servitude,” or work obligations. Progress and delay marked the Second Piano Concerto, which was sketched in two weeks, composed in less than two months but delayed for another five, in part by a hurried commission early in 1880 for a piece called “Montenegro at the Moment of Receiving Russia's Declaration of War against Turkey” to accompany a program of tableaux vivants comprising a “Dialogue of the Genius of Russia and History.” It celebrated the 25th anniversary of Alexander II's reign, to which others contributed. Tchaikovsky wrote “Montenegro” in six days, just to have the performance canceled and the score lost. He composed nothing else before June 1880 and no new orchestral work until September. He was still uncertain about the 1812 Overture in late September.

A state seeking the introduction of provisional measures must show that jurisdiction prima facie exists, notwithstanding conditions, reservations and the operation of reciprocity between declarations. There exists the possibility that acts carried out prior to the crucial date ‘nevertheless gave rise to a permanent situation inconsistent with international law which has continued to exist after the said date’. This latter eventuality is indeed reflected in the International Law Commission’s Draft Article 25 on State Responsibility. It is not the International Court of Justice alone which has had to formulate jurisprudence on the concept of ‘continuing events’: so has the European Court of Human Rights. This chapter offers a commentary on the proceedings instituted by Yugoslavia against Spain and by Serbia and Montenegro against Belgium, Canada, Netherlands, Portugal, and the United Kingdom. The chapter gives an opinion on each of the cases.

In the earlier phase of the case under discussion here, the International Court of Justice had chosen to base itself on jurisdictional considerations ratione temporis and ratione materiae. In the orders concerning Belgium, Canada, Netherlands, Portugal, and the United Kingdom, the Court observed that Yugoslavia’s declaration accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court under Article 36, paragraph 2, of the Statute, had been filed with the United Nations Secretary-General on April 26, 1999 (three days before the institution of proceedings). The Court found that the application was directed, in essence, against the bombing of Yugoslav territory by several members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. It observed that the bombings began on 24 March 1999. Accordingly, it considered that the disputes before it had arisen some time prior to April 25, 1999. Based on different reasoning, the Court has now confirmed that it lacks jurisdiction to entertain the claims presented by Serbia and Montenegro.

The International Court of Justice in its judgment found that the observations of Serbia and Montenegro, as discussed in this chpater, had not had the legal effect of discontinuance of proceedings under the rules. The starting point for discontinuance was Article 38, paragraph 2, of the Rules of Court, whereby the applicant ‘shall specify as far as possible the legal grounds upon which the jurisdiction of the Court is said to be based’. While United Nations General Assembly resolution 55/12 of 1 November 2000, admitting the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia as a new state, necessarily clarifies the legal situation thereafter, it remains debatable whether ‘from the vantage point from which the Court now looks at the legal situation’, the ‘new development in 2000…has clarified the thus far amorphous legal situation concerning the status of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia vis-à-vis the United Nations’ at the relevant time.

The International Court of Justice is in the thick of real life overlapping jurisdiction issues. It is currently hearing the Bosnia and Herzegovina v Serbia and Montenegro Genocide Convention Case: Bosnia and Herzegovina is currently pleading. For both evidence as to facts and claims as to law, Bosnia and Herzegovina relies very much on the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Serbia and Montenegro is taking a different route, calling witnesses of their own to testify. There has in fact been only one genocide conviction to date in the ICTY. There is a desire to ensure that the most heinous crimes do not escape justice, even when no special international tribunals may yet be established to ensure this: this is the underlying purpose of the principle of universal jurisdiction. Much has been made of the virtually sole example of a relatively recent court deliberately deciding an issue of general international law differently from how the same point had already been decided by the Court.