The international press reports the events in Bolivia with caution. It describes the overthrow of President Evo Morales, evokes yet another coup d’état, but fails to identify what is really happening. It does not see the emergence of a new political force, hitherto unknown in Latin America.
Part I, Part II, Part III Agreements on collaboration Based on existing evidence and data, as cited, it is clear that the coordination of military operations, political and tactical cooperation between Tito’s Partisans and Pavelić’s Ustashi during WWII on the territory of the Independent State of Croatia was planned and […]
Part I, Part II Historical sources of the historiography vs Titographic „history“ (II) In the context of this article’s particular contribution to the revision of official Titographic “history” of “our [Yugoslav] nations and nationalities” during WWII, the next section as a challenging research problem of this analysis addresses the real […]
Part I Historical sources of the historiography vs Titographic „history“ (I) The clarification of the issue of who Tito’s Partisans kept as their main, if not perhaps the only, political-military opponent and enemy during the entire WWII in Yugoslavia, is directly related to the topic of this article – the […]
The aim of this article is to contribute to Balkan and South Slavic historiography by examing the question of the direct and indirect military-political cooperation between the Partisans of the Austro-Hungarian Corporal and self-proclaimed „Marshal“, Josip Broz Tito of the Croat-Slovenian origin and the Nazi Ustashi leader (Poglavnik), Croat Ante […]
Part I Partitioning of Yugoslavia during WWII (1941−1945) Regardless of the reached agreement on the Croatian ethnopolitical autonomy in Yugoslavia, the (Roman Catholic) Croatian traditional and historical animosity and even a hate against the (Christian Orthodox) Serbs remained extremely strong – a fact which both Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini […]
Yugoslavia (the “land of South Slavs”) was a Balkan multi-ethnic state which emerged from the ruins of the Austrian-Hungarian Monarchy (est. 1867) and was officially announced to exist on December 1st, 1918 under the original name of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes.[i] The name was changed in June […]
Franjo Tudjman’s authoritarian regime in Croatia and the territorial expansionist policy of his HDZ’s ruling party during the bloody destruction of the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s were not noticed at all by the Western politicians, academicians and the global mass-media who, in contrast, accused “dictator”-President of Serbia Slobodan Miloshevic.
Tudjman’s personal efforts to make stronger his own political (authoritarian) position in Croatia at any cost of liberal democratic institutions are obvious and very similar to his counterpart in Serbia in the 1990s with one difference: Tudjman was more successful in destroying liberal democracy in Croatia in comparison to Miloshevic’s efforts to do the same in Serbia.
During the last quarter of a century, the global mainstream media unanimously accused Serbia and the Serbs of the national chauvinism as the main cause of the bloody wars on the territory of ex-Yugoslavia in the 1990s. However, the role and direct impact of the other Yugoslav republics and nations in the process of killing the common state was not taken into the consideration.