International conflicts in the successor states of Yugoslavia
With the break-up of Yugoslavia in the early 1990s, there were numerous international conflicts among the successor states of Yugoslavia . However, numerous dormant conflicts with other European states flared up anew, which the newly formed states now have to resolve.
The armed conflicts that followed the declaration of independence from Slovenia and Croatia in 1991 are among the greatest conflicts among the successor states of Yugoslavia . Today the EU's relations with the exclave of the not yet acceded successor states (including Albania) are summarized under the term Western Balkans .
Border conflicts
The disintegration of Yugoslavia
After the declaration of independence from Croatia and Slovenia, the Yugoslavia peace conference began in The Hague in September 1991 under the leadership of Peter Carrington . The Arbitration Commission of the Yugoslavia Peace Conference, which was headed by Robert Badinter , came to the conclusion on December 7, 1991 that it was "not a split off, but a disintegration" of the former Yugoslavia. The borders of the former socialist republics were retained and declared national borders by the Badinter Commission (serb./kroat./bosn. Badinterova komisija ).
Part of the Serbian national minority proclaimed the Republic of Serbian Krajina (RSK) in parts of Croatia where it constituted the majority, which comprised almost a third of the Croatian state territory. Almost all non-Serbs then fled the area or were expelled. The largest part of the RSK was finally reintegrated by military force (Operations Bljesak and Oluja ) in 1995 , while the remaining areas in Eastern Slavonia were initially placed under a UN interim administration ( UNTAES mission) according to the Erdut Agreement and not fully integrated into the Croatian state until 1998 were incorporated.
Land borders
The border between Croatia and Serbia
The course of the border between Serbia and Croatia along the Danube is still controversial today. While Serbia advocates demarcation along the middle of the river, such as on the Hungarian-Slovak, Serbian-Romanian or Romanian-Bulgarian border, Croatia claims the borders on the basis of former cadastral communities, which would account for 11,500 hectares of land in Croatia and 900 hectares in land Serbia. According to the border course based on cadastral communities and according to the Badinter Commission, some small but very fertile areas on the other side of the Danube belong to Croatia.
Since the Danube changed its course by a few kilometers in the last few centuries, the border did not always run in the middle of the river, but along oxbows of the Danube, or river islands emerged, which protruded into Serbian territory but belonged to Croatia. In the Erdut Agreement , signed by the Croatian government and a Serbian delegation in 1998, Eastern Slavonia , which was under the control of Serb insurgents, was returned to Croatian administration. At that time the border was provisionally defined as the middle course of the Danube. Therefore, Serbian-Montenegrin military forces took control of the disputed Danube Islands (including the Šarengradska Ada and the Vukovarska Ada ), which are located on the Serbian side of the river.
Even after this agreement, there were isolated incidents by Croatians with Serbian military patrol boats on the Danube. In the meantime, Serbian police forces took over the border protection. The total area of the disputed areas, which are now under Serbian administration, is 115 km².
The border between Croatia and Montenegro
The southernmost point of Croatia is the Prevlaka peninsula to the left of the entrance to the bay. Immediately adjacent is the Bay of Kotor , which is now in Montenegro . A Croatian minority has lived in the Bay of Kotor for centuries. After the war, Montenegro was initially part of the state of Serbia and Montenegro, which was then known as the “ rest of Yugoslavia ”. The Prevlaka Peninsula has long been controversial, as from this point the entire entrance to the Bay of Kotor can be controlled. Almost the entire military fleet of the former Yugoslav People's Army (JNA) was stationed in Montenegro. The central administration for Montenegro was in Belgrade, which is why solving the problem was long in question. Serbia – Montenegro later accepted that the Prevlaka peninsula was part of Croatia. From 1996–2002 an independent UN mission was conducted here, the United Nations Mission of Observers in Prevlaka (UNMOP).
However, there is still disagreement regarding the associated border in the Adriatic, especially with regard to suspected oil and natural gas deposits in this area.
The border between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro
Not far from the Prevlaka peninsula , in the front part of the Bay of Kotor, is the area of the (former) municipality of Sutorina , which belonged to Bosnia and Herzegovina until 1946 and thus represented the country's second access to the sea alongside Neum . The place Igalo and the Bjelotina massif also belong to the 75 square kilometer area ; it has 9.3 kilometers of coastline. In an agreement between the then Prime Ministers of the two Yugoslav republics, the territory was added to Montenegro in 1947. This place had previously belonged to Herzegovina as a corridor. After the breakup of Yugoslavia, the Bosnian side repeatedly called for the area in question to be returned to Bosnia and Herzegovina. In the second half of 2014, a working group was set up by both states with the aim of finding a solution to this dispute. In autumn 2014, the Bosnian MP Denis Bećirović from the opposition SDP submitted a motion to the parliament of Bosnia and Herzegovina, according to which the area should formally belong to Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro would only have been granted a continuous right of use. This motion was rejected on May 14, 2015 by a majority in parliament. The governments of both countries consider the matter to be closed. On August 24, 2015 - in the course of the Western Balkans Conference in Vienna - the President of Montenegro, Filip Vujanović , and the Chairman of the Bosnia-Herzegovina State Presidency, Dragan Čović , signed a definitive border treaty between the two states.
The border between Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina
The longest border within the former confederation of Yugoslavia is the border between Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina . In the town of Neum in southern Dalmatia , the Croatian territory is divided by an approximately eight kilometer wide section of the Herzegovinian coastline. To solve the problem, construction work began in 2007 on the Pelješac Bridge , which was intended to connect the two Croatian parts of the country and bypass the Bosnian-Herzegovinian territory. After the construction work was stopped for the time being in 2012, it is to be continued in autumn 2017. The completion date for the new bridge is planned for 2022.
A part of the border along the Una river near Martin Brod and some villages at the foot of the Plješevica mountain belong to the cadastre of Croatia, while others belong to Bosnia and Herzegovina. This leads to numerous border crossings along the valley and hampers economic development in this region. For these reasons, the train connection Zagreb- Bihać - Split is still without passenger traffic. The road from Karlovac via Bihać to Knin , which is part of the European route E 71 , is less and less used as Croatia built a new motorway west of this route.
The border demarcation on the Una between the places Hrvatska Kostajnica (Croatia) and Kostajnica (Bosnia and Herzegovina) is not seen as a final solution, especially by the Croatian side. During the Austro-Hungarian Empire , both parts belonged to one city ( Kostajnica ). A river island between these two cities belongs to the cadastre of Croatia, but is under Bosnian control. Both states agreed to set up an international border crossing point on the said island.
Another very important problem for Croatia will be securing the long EU external border . One of the most important drug routes to Europe ("Balkan route") also runs here. However, Croatia will also stand up for the interests of the Croats who live on the other side of the border, in Herzegovina and in Bosnia.
The question of dual citizenship will also be of great importance for Croatians in Bosnia and Herzegovina . Due to the current legal situation, they are entitled to dual citizenship, regardless of their whereabouts. However, non-Croatians can only obtain Croatian citizenship if they have lived in Croatia for more than five years.
The border between Slovenia and Croatia
Course of the Mur
Since the collapse of old Yugoslavia, there has still been no agreement on the course of the state borders between Croatia and Slovenia along the Mur . A border regime from the time of the Badinter Commission therefore still applies . The arbitration committee set up by the European Community under the former French Justice Minister Robert Badinter delivered several legal opinions from 1991 to 1992 on the international legal situation in the states of the former Yugoslavia. The Arbitration Commission then confirmed the breakup of Yugoslavia . This definition was then used in all international law documents. The Badinter Commission confirmed, among other things, the international law principle uti juris possidetis (German what you own, you should own it ), according to which the former republic borders were declared state borders.
This definition has its practical pitfalls in the Slovenian-Croatian border area, because this area in the former Yugoslavia was listed in both cadastral registers. The border on the Mur is one of the historically oldest borders in Europe (formerly between Austria and Hungary ). The Mur has changed its course a little over time and is still doing so. While the Slovenian cadastral border extends over the Dragonja River in the Bay of Piran, the opposite is true for the Mur. There the Croatian cadastre extends over the river to the Slovenian side. In particular in 2005, when there were numerous floods, the conflicting areas of responsibility became apparent.
In the summer of 2006 there was a conflict situation. This was triggered by improvements in flood protection along the Mur, initiated by the Croatian side. The construction work should take place on the Croatian cadastral area. However, the plots are owned by Slovenian owners. Croatia wanted to improve flood protection measures, with a Croatian construction team strengthening the dams in the disputed area and building a bridge over the Mur. Slovenian landowners immediately protested to Prime Minister Janez Janša , who dispatched special police troops to the border in the area of Hotiza , thereby stopping construction.
In early September 2006 the Prime Ministers of Croatia and Slovenia, Ivo Sanader and Janez Janša, paid a visit to the area. Both agreed that the work should be carried out by a joint consortium and monitored by a Croatian-Slovenian police patrol. Slovenian journalists wanted to film this patrol the following week when it was supposed to be deployed for the first time. Although a filming permit apparently existed and the journalists did not cross the Mur, the Croatian police arrested the journalists.
The government in Ljubljana immediately took the initiative and dispatched a heavily armed special police unit to protect Slovenian territory. Foreign Minister Dimitrij Rupel immediately wrote a letter to the EU Commission , which, however, replied that it was a purely bilateral problem that could be resolved with good will.
The Croatian Foreign Minister Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović criticized Foreign Minister Rupel's harsh approach as undiplomatic. The Slovenian side was also accused of exaggerating the border problems, as all of this took place in the pre-election campaign for the Slovenian local elections. These elections were supposed to be the first big test of mood for the conservative coalition of Prime Minister Janez Janša. Local representatives asked for the heavily armed Slovenian special forces to be removed.
Military installation on the Sichelberg
The military installation of the former Yugoslav People's Army on Mount Sveta Gera (Slovene Trdinov vrh , German Sichelberg ) caused a diplomatic conflict in the 1990s. It was dissolved by the Yugoslav People's Army in 1991, but was subsequently taken over by the Slovenian Army . The military barracks are located on Croatian territory by mutual agreement, but can only be reached via Slovenia.
Border disputes in the area of the Dragonja Estuary
Within the former Yugoslavia, the course of the Dragonja river was defined as the border between the socialist republics of Croatia and Slovenia. The Dragonja flows south of the Slovenian Portorož into the Adriatic Sea , into the bay of Piran . The course of the river is also problematic here, as the mouth of the Dragonja is very swampy and it is difficult to define a clear border course. Slovenia claims the towns of Škudelini, Bužin and Mlini-Škrile, which are located south of the Dragonja, for themselves. The definition of the border along the Dragonja and the Odorik Canal (Croatian Canal sv. Odorika ) is also controversial .
In particular in the mouth area of the Dragonja there are still numerous uncertainties about the exact borderline. There is a border crossing point, but not all plots have been regulated by the cadastre (some plots are recorded in the cadastral registers of both countries). As a result, Joško Joras, a Slovenian politician whose house is located in the area south of the Dragonja that is claimed by both states, has received a lot of media attention in recent years. He refuses to recognize Croatian jurisdiction and in the past has often demonstratively expressed signs of protest (such as hanging the Slovenian flag on his house and at the same time inscribing that this was never Croatian state territory). In the past, Joras crossed the borderline claimed by Croatia several times over a gravel path that leads from his home to Slovenia. In 2004 there was even a minor international uproar when a group of politicians from the Slovenian People's Party (SLS) paid a visit to Joras without having to pass the Croatian border post. On their return, this group was arrested by the Croatian border guards, which caused a lot of media coverage on both sides as the arrest was filmed on Slovenian television.
The Croatian customs guard then barricaded access to Joras' private road with massive flower pots. Most recently, a Slovenian court ruled in May 2006 that these barriers should be removed. However, the decision was not accepted by the Croatian diplomats. After the decision of the interior ministers of both countries on May 25, 2008, Joras received a key for the ramp to be built on the gravel road near the Plovanija border crossing instead of the flower pots.
The sea border between Slovenia and Croatia
Boundary in the bay of Piran
The biggest problem in the Slovenian-Croatian border conflict is the demarcation of the border in the Bay of Piran . Croatia refers to Article 15, Clause 1 of the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea , which - as a rule - provides for a median line as the border:
- If the coasts of two states lie opposite one another or are adjacent to one another, then, in the absence of an agreement to the contrary between these two states, neither of them is entitled to extend their territorial sea beyond the median line on which each point is equidistant from the closest points on the baseline, from which the breadth of the territorial sea of each of the two states is measured.
Slovenia relies on sentence 2 of the same Article 15 of the Convention on the Law of the Sea , according to which other aspects are to be used:
- However, this provision does not apply if, due to historical legal titles or other special circumstances, it is necessary to differentiate between the territorial seas of the two states.
Slovenia argues that the Piran Bay was largely under Slovenian administration until 1991 and that Slovenia would otherwise not have access to the open sea due to its location in the bay. Croatia argues that Slovenian ships are entitled to cross the Croatian sea areas anyway due to the right of peaceful passage .
In 2001, the then Prime Ministers of Slovenia and Croatia, Janez Drnovšek and Ivica Račan , agreed on a compromise that provided Slovenia with access to international waters and, in return, the surrender of some Slovenian areas to Croatia.
The treaty was initialed by the then Croatian Prime Minister Račan , but since it was heavily criticized by the Croatian public, it was rejected and not ratified by the Croatian parliament .
In January 2012, the two states agreed on an arbitration tribunal that consisted of the French international lawyer Gilbert Guillaume , the British lawyer Vaughan Lowe , the German-Austrian international lawyer Bruno Simma as well as the lawyer proposed by Croatia, Budislav Vukas, and the arbitrator Jernej Sekolec , nominated by Slovenia . After a conspiratorial conversation between Sekolec and Simona Drenik, Slovenia's representative in arbitration, was published in the Serbian edition of Newsweek in July 2015 , both of them resigned from their functions at the arbitration tribunal. On June 29, 2017, the arbitral tribunal gave its verdict, awarding large parts of the bay of Slovenia; However, as Croatia had previously left the proceedings, the Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenković announced that he would not recognize the decision. The European Court of Justice , which was then called upon by Slovenia, declared itself inconsistent in 2020.
Ecological reserve
.png)
blue: Croatian claim to an exclusive economic zone ( Zaštićeni ekološko-ribolovni pojas , ZERP)
In 2004, Croatia declared the entire Croatian marine area to be an ecological reserve and a controlled fishing zone in order to protect the sensitive marine fauna and vegetation in the Croatian sea area. As part of Slovenia's concerns about the establishment of an exclusive economic zone in the Adriatic, a meeting of the Adriatic Trilaterals (Slovenia, Croatia, Italy) took place on June 4, 2004. Slovenia regards the Croatian Exclusive Economic Zone as a unilateral predetermination (prejudice) of the borders with this state. In the agreed minutes , signed by the former Croatian State Secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Hidajet Biščević , it was stipulated that Croatia will refrain from activating the Exclusive Ecological and Fisheries Zone (ZERP) on European citizens and legal persons as long as this is done in the context of the accession negotiations fishing negotiations are not regulated. In return, Croatia was promised to start accession negotiations.
Nevertheless, Croatia wanted to fully activate the exclusive fishing zone on January 1, 2008, as declining fish stocks could be observed in the entire Adriatic as early as 2007. In particular, the Croatian Farmers' Party insisted that Croatia's Exclusive Economic Zone in the Adriatic should also apply to EU citizens. Slovenia and the EU threatened to freeze 5 to 6 negotiating chapters if Croatia continued to apply the Exclusive Economic Zone (ZERP). The Croatian government then decreed in February 2008 that the ecological protection zone should remain in place, but not be applied to the member states of the EU.
Slovenia, for its part, declared an exclusive economic zone on February 21, 2006. The law was declared null and void by the Croatian side immediately after it was proclaimed, as, according to the Croatian view, it provides for Slovenian maritime law influence to the south of Poreč on Istria .
Agreement to Prevent Border Incidents
In June 2005, the Slovenian Foreign Minister Dimitrij Rupel and his Croatian counterpart Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović agreed on a declaration to prevent border incidents.
Slovenian Protests and National Heritage Preservation Institute
At the beginning of 2007 the Croatian parliament extended the concession for the mineral oil company INA for the use of natural gas deposits in the northern Adriatic, an area 45 km west of Pula in Croatian waters. The Slovenian government then sent a protest note to Zagreb, expressing its displeasure with the fact that “this is another of the numerous attempts with which Croatia is sending the interstate sea borders, as well as the associated territorial waters, the seabed and the bottom underneath seek to prejudice ”.
The former Vice Prime Minister of Slovenia Marjan Podobnik ( SLS ) founded the Zavod 25. junij - Zavod za varovanje narodne dediščine (German Institute June 25th - Institute for Preservation of the People's Heritage , referring to June 25, 1991, the day of Declaration of Independence of Slovenia), which is committed to changing the existing borders.
The question of an arbitration tribunal
Croatia tightened its diplomatic approach from 2007. Slovenia continually clashes with the opinion of the Badinter Arbitration Commission from 1992, which Croatia for its part accepted without reservation. In its statements, the Slovenian government always insisted on the "status of June 25, 1991", the day Slovenia and Croatia declared independence. Protests to the address of the EU or the UN are not excluded.
The prime ministers of the two states agreed in Bled ("Bled Agreement") to turn to an international arbitration tribunal on the border issue . Each state should present its own arguments before this arbitration tribunal.
Since the Slovenian veto in December 2008, Croatia has wanted the EU to be present in bilateral talks on the border conflict. The Slovenian President Danilo Türk prefers an arbitration procedure instead of an arbitration tribunal.
Slovenia's veto
On December 19, 2008, at the meeting of EU foreign ministers, Slovenia vetoed the opening of further negotiating chapters on Croatia's membership of the European Union . Slovenia justifies the veto with alleged Croatian territorial claims on Slovenian territory. The Croatian government, as well as the Croatian President, and the Legal Advisory Council of the EU Council stated in advance that no Croatian document prejudices the demarcation of the border with Slovenia . Slovenia used its position as an EU member state in the Council of the EU to postpone Croatia's EU accession date indefinitely or even to prevent EU accession. As a result, the Croatian public reacted angrily at the behavior of their neighbors, with whom - according to President Stjepan Mesić - they once shared a common state and with whom they share many cultural values and millennia-old traditions. In Croatia, immediately after the Slovenian veto, the number of votes to boycott Slovenian goods in the future increased, whereupon the Croatian Prime Minister and President appealed to the common sense.
On September 10, 2009, the Slovenian Prime Minister Borut Pahor announced the lifting of the veto. This was preceded by talks with his Croatian colleague Jadranka Kosor , in which Croatia undertook to withdraw all documents that prejudice a border between Croatia and Slovenia. This separates the question of accession negotiations from the border dispute. The final demarcation should then be clarified in an arbitration court supported by the EU, according to the proposal by Olli Rehn . Only the foreign affairs committee of the Slovenian parliament had to approve this step, which it did unanimously on September 29th. The arbitration agreement was signed in Stockholm on November 4, 2009 by the two prime ministers in the presence of the Swedish Prime Minister and acting chairman of the European Council, Fredrik Reinfeldt , which was confirmed on the Slovenian side by a close referendum on June 6, 2010.
Other conflicts
Savings deposits at the Slovenian Ljubljanska banka
After the collapse of Yugoslavia, the whereabouts of approximately US $ 60 million in savings of Croatian citizens in the Zagreb branch of Ljubljanska banka (now Nova Ljubljanska Banka ) remained unclear. Croatia accuses Slovenia of transferring savings to Slovenia. Slovenia rejects any guilt and insists that the savings were transferred to Croatia with Croatia's independence. Croatia demands a refund of savings deposits to all savers at Ljubljanska banka. Because of the opaque situation, no solution is yet in sight.
Krško nuclear power plant in Slovenia
The Krško nuclear power plant is another point of contention between Croatia and Slovenia. It was built in the times of the former Yugoslavia with the joint participation of Slovenia and Croatia (50:50 participation) and is still owned by both countries.
Kosovo conflict and the Albanian question
- → Main article: History of Kosovo
The Kosovo received in 1974 under pressure from the local Albanian majority and the official Albania under Enver Hoxha the status of an autonomous region within Serbia . Although the province was formally subordinate to Serbia, it enjoyed a high degree of autonomy: from its own regional parliament to the right to university education in Albanian. In contrast to the six constituent republics of Yugoslavia, which according to the constitution had a right to secession and were recognized by the Badinter Commission as successor states of Yugoslavia in 1991, the Albanian majority in Kosovo was not granted the right to self-determination or secession, among other things because Albanians were already there have a national state (Albania) and Kosovo did not have the status of a republic in the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia .
In the course of adapting the territorial order of Serbia to the changed framework conditions after the collapse of Yugoslavia, some powers of the province were restricted in a constitutional amendment with the consent of the regional parliaments of Kosovo and Vojvodina. For example, Kosovo's competencies in national defense were restricted. On the other hand, the UÇK sought secession , which successfully internationalized the conflict.
Succession, Restitution and Reparation
All successor states have committed to returning certain cultural assets to their respective countries of origin. However, the restitution process is often lengthy. There are various succession agreements.
Little or no has been said about the extent of compensation or reparations payments to war victims or the settlement of war damage.
International conflicts with states outside the former Yugoslav area
Conflicts with Greece
Name dispute over Macedonia
This conflict has existed since the establishment of the Republic of Macedonia (Makedonija) from the Yugoslav republic of Macedonia in 1991, because there is a Greek region of Macedonia (Makedonía) . Greece fears separatist influences in the north. An interim compromise was therefore found in 1993 that the successor state should be recognized under the international official country name The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM, dt. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia ). This question was in the foreseeable future at the Western Balkans Conference , but was subject to renewed bilateral tensions due to the events of the EU refugee crisis on the Balkan route .
The question was then brought to a close in January 2019 when the state adopted the new name North Macedonia .
Conflicts with Italy
Historical prehistory to the conflicts with Italy
Between 1943 and 1950 and in a further surge after 1954, between 200,000 and 350,000 Italians migrated from Yugoslav-controlled areas (such as the Free Territory of Trieste ) to Italian areas. Conversely, many Slovenes and Croats immigrated to Yugoslavia.
The different perception of this movement was also reflected in the linguistic regulations: For example, the Italian emigrants in Yugoslavia were called "Optanten" (similar to the South Tyrolean Optanten ), in Italy they were called " exiles " or " expellees " (ital. And croat. esuli ).
Slovenian-Italian conflicts
When Slovenia joined the EU, Slovenia undertook to pay compensation for the expulsion of the Italian population. However, Italy refused to accept these payments as many displaced persons still do not want to give up ownership of their former possessions. Slovenia therefore paid the compensation into a specific account in which there is still a considerable sum that was never accepted by the Italian state.
Italian Citizenship Law
In 2006, the Italian government under Silvio Berlusconi amended the Citizenship Act, which now provides that all Italians who live outside of Italian territory also receive the right to Italian citizenship for the period before 1945 . The Croatian President and Prime Minister were critical of this because it would induce long-established Croatian citizens to change their citizenship for economic reasons. Croatia sees in this a possibility for an easier takeover of Croatian property.
Foibe massacre
The term Foibe massacre refers to war crimes that occurred during and after the Second World War . At that time, Yugoslav partisans committed crimes as revenge against the Italian population in the Istrian and Dalmatian coastal areas. The victims were thrown into karst caves , so-called foibs. The victims of these massacres were mainly non-communists who opposed communist Yugoslavia or who were even viewed by the new rulers as a possible danger. Other motives were ethnic cleansing measures against the Italian-speaking part of the population and personal acts of revenge. The exact number of victims is not known, various historians estimate that between 5,000 and 21,000 deaths, in some cases including the Italians who perished in the Yugoslav camps.
On the 60th anniversary of the Paris Peace Conference, the Italian President Giorgio Napolitano spoke of the Foibe massacre as a "barbarism of the century". He complained of "bloodthirsty Slavic hatred", "ethnic cleansing" and "annexionist tendencies". Croatian President Stjepan Mesić reacted with dismay to such statements from the Italian side. He said the signs of overt racism, historical revisionism and political revanchism were obvious and it was difficult to reconcile this with the declared desire to improve bilateral relations between the two countries.
See also
Web links
Individual evidence
- ↑ ICTY indictment against Slobodan Milošević, paragraph 69 (PDF; 3.5 MB)
- ↑ See Amnesty International, Torture and Deliberate and Arbitrary Killings in War Zones, New York 1991; Hannes Grandits / Christian Promitzer, "Former Comrades" at War. Historical Perspectives on "Ethnic Cleansing" in Croatia, in: Joel M. Halpern / David A. Kideckel (eds.), Neighbors at War. Anthropological Perspectives on Yugoslav Ethnicity, Culture and History, University Park, PA 2000, pp. 125 ff.
- ↑ United Nations Mission of Observers in Prevlaka (UNMOP) , on un.org (materials on the mission).
- ^ Dusica Tomovic: Montenegro, Croatia, Spat Over Adriatic Oil Probes. On: balkaninsight.com, November 4, 2014.
- ^ Bosnian claims to the Bay of Kotor. Report, Adelheid Wölfl, in: der Standard online, January 30, 2015
- ↑ Nedim Tuno, Admir Mulahusić, Mithad Kozličić, Zvonko Orešković: Border reconstruction of the Sutorina exit of Bosnia and Herzegovina to the Adriatic Sea by using old maps. onA (pdf, ddomusic.com, accessed April 25, 2013).
- ↑ Crna Gora: Završeno razgraničenje s BiH. On: Al Jazeera Balkans, December 25, 2014.
- ↑ Elvira M. Jukix: Bosnia-Montenegro Border Row Heats up. On: balkaninsight.com, January 22, 2015.
- ^ Elvira M. Jukic, Dusica Tomovic: Bosnia, Montenegro End Dispute Over Borders. On: balkaninsight.com, May 15, 2015.
- ^ Montenegro-Bosnia border treaty signed in Vienna. In: Salzburger Nachrichten online, August 26, 2015, accessed on September 1, 2015.
- ^ Western Balkans Conference - Border Agreement between Bosnia and Montenegro. In: Tiroler Tageszeitung online, 23 August 2015.
- ^ Pelješac Bridge to Be Constructed Within 3.5 Years . ( total-croatia-news.com [accessed May 8, 2017]).
- ↑ The reports of the EC Arbitration Commission ("Badinter Commission") (English)
- ↑ a b Net.hr. Slovenski zahtjev je nemoguć (January 4, 2009)
- ^ Vlada RH. Izvješće o provedbi plana provedbe Sporazuma o stabilizaciji i pridruživanju između Republike Hrvatske i Europskih zajednica i njihovih država članica za rujan 2006. godine ( page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ^ The crazy neighbors ( Memento of the original from December 28, 2007 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , ORF September 14, 2006.
- ↑ MVPEI RH. Press Release 203/06. Minister of Foreign Affairs Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović on the recent events on the left bank of the Mura River ( Memento from 7 July 2009 in the Internet Archive )
- ^ RTV SLO. Rupel in Kitarovićeva s pomirjenim tonom
- ↑ Ministrstvo za zunajne zadeve (dr. Rupel). Bijela knjiga o granici između Republike Slovenije i Republike Hrvatske ( Memento from September 19, 2009 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF; 3.0 MB)
- ↑ Joško Joras opet izvjesio slovensku zastavu na kući (December 27, 2002) ( Memento of July 7, 2009 in the Internet Archive )
- ^ RTV SLO. hud incident na meji (September 22, 2004)
- ↑ Vjesnik. Joras opet ilegalno prešao granicu (April 20, 2006) ( Memento of November 13, 2007 in the Internet Archive )
- ↑ Joras će dobiti ključ od rampe na prijelazu Plovanija
- ^ Slovenia, a border region with a role model function (Dissertation Andreas Veres, 2007), PDF, p. 185
- ↑ Vjesnik: Slovenci već prisvojili more koje im je sporazumom Račan-Drnovšek tek obećano ?! (September 1, 2001, including map) ( Page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ Vjesnik: Davor Vidas: "Rješenja iz sporazuma su bespredmetne improvizacije" (November 28, 2008) ( Memento of December 2, 2008 in the Internet Archive )
- ↑ Vjesnik. Slovenija je 1991. predložila Hrvatskoj da granica u Piranskom zaljevu ide crtom sredine (September 3, 2003) ( Page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ Newsweek.rs ( Memento from July 24, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) from July 22, 2015 (Serbian)
- ↑ rtvslo.si
- ↑ tagesschau.de
- ^ Marine Strauss: EU court will not intervene in Croatia-Slovenia border dispute . In: Thomson Reuters (ed.): Reuters . January 31, 2020 ( reuters.com [accessed April 20, 2020]).
- ↑ Delo.si Pahor prejel odgovor komisije glede ERC (March 5, 2008) ( Memento of July 7, 2009 in the Internet Archive )
- ↑ Delo.si Rupel: Hrvaška pogajalska izhodišča prejudicirajo mejo (October 13, 2008) ( Memento of October 29, 2008 in the Internet Archive )
- ^ Trilateral meeting between Italy, Slovenia and Croatia. Agreed minutes of June 4, 2004 ( Memento of July 7, 2009 in the Internet Archive ) (English)
- ^ Metro Portal. Sanader: ZERP ostaje na snazi, ali se neće primjenjivati (March 11, 2008)
- ↑ Ministrstvo za zunanje zadeve. Slovenija uradno obvestila OZN o zakonu o ekološki coni in epikontinentalnem pasu (February 22, 2006) ( Memento from April 25, 2008 in the Internet Archive )
- ↑ Vjesnik. Ipak ZERP (October 5, 2007) ( Memento from July 7, 2009 in the Internet Archive )
- ↑ Ministarstvo poljoprivrede, ribarstva i ruralnog razvoja (RH): ZERP za Uniju ne vrijedi (November 13, 2006) ( Memento of July 22, 2007 in the Internet Archive )
- ↑ ORF.at Volksgruppen, Zagreb rejects Ljubljana's plans
- ↑ Vlada.hr: Hrvatska i Slovenija potpisale izjavu o izbjegavanju incidenata (June 10, 2005) ( Memento of the original from July 8, 2009 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ Vjesnik, January 29, 2007, Nerazumna Rupelova nota (Croatian) ( Memento of the original from December 23, 2007 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ Zavod June 25th
- ↑ Dnevnik.si. Dogovor Janša - Sanader: Nerešena meja se seli v Haag (August 27, 2007)
- ↑ Vjesnik. Odlučnost da se pregovori završe 2009. (December 19, 2008) ( Memento of the original of July 7, 2009 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ Tportal.hr. Pahor ne shvaća zašto Sanader želi treću osobu (December 23, 2008)
- ↑ ORF.at. For arbitration in border disputes (January 12, 2008)
- ↑ After EU veto against Croatia: Pressure on Slovenia increases (December 19, 2008)
- ↑ Globus No. 942, December 23, 2008. p. 23
- ↑ HRT. Tisuću godina zajedno (December 30, 2008) ( Page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ Vecernji List: Unification of Slovenia and Croatia ( Memento from September 14, 2009 in the Internet Archive ), from September 11, 2009 (Croatian)
- ↑ EurActiv: Croatia's EU accession is approaching Sep 30, 2009.
- ↑ unofficial scan on Europolitics.info ( memento from February 23, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF; 1.4 MB)
- ↑ EU Council Presidency: Croatia and Slovenia agreed on border issue - EU closer to enlargement ( Memento from September 18, 2015 in the Internet Archive )
- ↑ Reuters - News from June 7, 2010
- ↑ a b Slovenia, a border region with a role model function (Dissertation Andreas Veres, 2007, Ruhr University Bochum), PDF, p. 158 (accessed on January 11, 2009)
- ^ Croatian National Bank. OČITOVANJE HRVATSKE NARODNE BANKE O PROBLEMU DEVIZNE ŠTEDNJE HRVATSKIH GRAĐANA U LJUBLJANSKOJ BANCI (March 14, 2006) ( Memento from June 25, 2008 in the Internet Archive )
- ↑ Nuklearna elektrarna Krško. Management. ( Memento from June 25, 2009 in the Internet Archive )
- ↑ Comment on tagesspiegel.de (accessed on January 20, 2009).
