Historical Views

23-70

Authors: Safet Bandžović

Complex socio-historical processes and turning epochs, as well as numerous segments that are an integral part of people's lives, are the subject of interdisciplinary studies. War is one of the most dramatic, most complex social phenomena. In addition to armed operations, there are a number of other dimensions related to war, starting from psychological, legal, sociological, social, economic, cultural to others. Critical and multiple perspectives contribute to the completion of images of politics, wars and their relations. The disintegrations of the ideological paradigm and the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia were accompanied by the (re)construction of new national identities, the outbreak and duration of „wars“ of different memories, the reshaping of consciousness and the re-examination of history, especially those related to World War II. The history of that war in Yugoslavia was undoubtedly the history of several wars which were stacked on top of each other. The main issue with Bosniaks in that war is a multiperspectival topic that requires a multidimensional and deideologized presentation of the position and the position of all involved actors. Numerous issues related to that war, the complex position of Bosniaks in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Sandžak, the emergence of civic responsibility, Bosniak protection of the vulnerable Serb Orthodox population, humanity and assistance, beyond post-war ideological premises and „official truths“ remained more or less marginalized, although they seek more objective and complete answers from multiple angles, for the sake of a more complete view of the past. What is called „local“ or „regional history“, as evidenced by diverse experiences, indicates the multidimensionality of the past, its features and specifics in a certain area. The Second World War in Sandžak could not be understood more objectively outside the broader Yugoslav context. This is also special for the history of Novi Pazar, the largest city in Sandžak which was the subject of many different political plans and conceptions. The history of this city has several sections. After the withdrawal of German forces from Novi Pazar, the Chetniks tried to conquer this city for three times in the fall of 1941. However, thanks to the dedicated defense and the help of Albanian armed groups from Kosovo, Bosniaks managed to defend themselves and Novi Pazar. Even in such a dramatic situation, numerous examples of humanity, solidarity and assistance of Bosniaks to the intimidated Serb urban population have been recorded. In the most difficult days of the war, when Novi Pazar was exposed to Chetnik attacks, a significant part of Bosniaks took actions to prevent anarchy, to save Serbs from terror and revenge. The task of science is to constantly discover forgotten and unknown parts of the past, to re-examine previous knowledge. Everything that happened has a whole range of perspectives. It is necessary to have a multidimensional understanding of the causes and course of events, circuits and time limits, to explain narrowed alternatives. Any reduction of historical totality to only one dimension is problematic. Every nation, every state, in a way, write their „histories“, remember different personalities, events, dates, emphasize various roles, perpetuates monuments, emphatize with different causes and consequences. Contemporary abuses of the interpretation of the war past, one-sided approaches, fierce prejucides and quasi-historical analyzes in the service of the politics damage interethic relations and lead to further growth of tensions and distancing between nations and states in their region.

93-121

Authors: Jasmin Jajčević

In terms of historiography, the history of Bosnia and Herzegovina after the Second World War has been dealt with by many historians and scholars, dealing with and researching topics related to the economy, culture, the issue of religious communities, political circumstances, etc. What is lacking in historiographical research in the period after the Second World War is certainly the question of education (educational opportunities), as well as the question of the repercussions and consequences of the Informbiro crisis in the period from 1948 to 1956 for Bosnia and Herzegovina. The period from 1948 to 1956 is one of the most dramatic and fateful phases in the recent history of the South Slavic countries, ie Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is a period of very contradictory and turbulent social processes, which have led to complex changes in all areas of socio-economic and political reality, both domestically (in Yugoslavia and Bosnia and Herzegovina) and internationally. Stalin's attempt to subjugate the Yugoslav party leadership to Soviet domination will lead to an open split between Tito and Stalin (Yugoslavia and the USSR), which will have major consequences for the development of the Yugoslav political system, will lead to universal persecution of all those who voted for politics. Informbiroa in Yugoslavia. The conflict will have a particular impact on the political, economic and social situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The aim of this paper is to point out the historical sources that are in the archives of Bosnia and Herzegovina, archives in Belgrade (Archives of Yugoslavia) and Zagreb on the basis of which the necessary data can be drawn to understand this issue, as well as to point to historiography (books, collections of papers and journals) that dealt with the issue of the Informbiro crisis in the period from 1948 to 1956 and its reflection on the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina. This is due to the fact that very few scientists and historians have dealt with this issue, as well as that there is very little historical literature for this period, especially for the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It should be noted that we have a historian who has dealt with this issue at the micro level, and as a result a book was published in 2005 entitled „Informbiro and Northeast Bosnia: Echoes and Consequences of the KPJ-Informbiro Conflict (1948-1953)", where the general public with this event, which has a great impact on the political and socio-economic situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. From the appearance of this book until today, there have been attempts to shed light on this issue through several scientific conferences and round tables, and the result has been published collections of papers, as well as articles published in some journals, both in Bosnia and Herzegovina and wider.

135-183

Authors: Meldijana Arnaut Haseljić

The General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Dayton Peace Agreement) accepted in Paris on December 14, 1995 was signed by: for the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina Alija Izetbegović, for the Republic of Croatia dr. Franjo Tudjman and Slobodan Milosevic for the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. There are good reasons why the international community has demanded that these people be signatories to the Dayton Peace Agreement. Namely, after unsuccessful attempts to establish an agreement on constitutional solutions in Bosnia and Herzegovina, starting with Cutileiro's plan (cantonization of Bosnia and Herzegovina on ethnic grounds), on which talks in Sarajevo began in February 1992, until the conference in London on 26 and On August 27, 1992, it was obvious that the positions of the Serb and Croat sides in Bosnia and Herzegovina were being harmonized with the positions of Belgrade and Zagreb, that is, the policies previously agreed and agreed upon on the Milosevic-Tudjman route. Three delegations participated in the conference in London. On behalf of the Bosnia and Herzegovina Government were President Alija Izetbegović, Minister of Foreign Affairs Haris Silajdžić, Ejup Ganić and General Sefer Halilović. The Bosnian Serb delegation included Radovan Karadzic, RS President Momcilo Krajisnik, RS Vice President and VRS General Ratko Mladic, who were in direct consultations with Belgrade throughout the negotiations. Representatives of Bosnian Croats were the President of HZ HB Mate Boban, then the Prime Minister of Republic Bosnia and Herzegovina, Mile Akmadžić (although he was a member of the Government of Republic Bosnia and Herzegovina, he participated as a member of the Croatian delegation) and General Milivoj Petković. Croatian President Franjo Tudjman also took part in the negotiations and was the unofficial but de facto head of the Croatian delegation. Following the London Conference and the failure of the previous negotiations, the European Community Conference on Yugoslavia was expanded to include the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia, chaired by Cyrus Vance (US diplomat on behalf of the UN) and Lord David Owen (on behalf of the EC / U). a new era of peace negotiations. Vance-Owen's plan foresaw the decentralization of Bosnia and Herzegovina within the existing borders with a constitutional order based on federal principles contained in a number of constitutive elements - regions (ten cantons formed on ethnic principles) and with the Sarajevo district where the central government would be located. This plan, after the refusal of the Serbian Assembly from Pale to ratify it, was definitely rejected. This was followed by the Owen-Stoltenberg Peace Plan (Constitutional Agreement on the Alliance of the Republics of Bosnia and Herzegovina) which offered a confederation of Bosnia and Herzegovina composed of three republics made up of ethnicity, but this plan also proved unacceptable. The Contact Group's plan followed the establishment of the Washington Agreement, which established the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in March 1994. This plan provided for the preservation of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a union within its internationally recognized borders, and territorial division according to the percentage of territory (51:49). The Serbian leadership in Pale also refused to accept this proposal. The international community had to look for new solutions. The Contact Group's plan was a step towards negotiations that will result in the signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement. However, it is important to note that all the plans offered led to the discovery of hidden policies created by the eastern and western neighbors of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Also, all the proposed proposals for "peace plans", which the international community tried to impose in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, were based on constitutional devastation and territorial division, thus accepting armed conquests and occupation of the area with the ultimate goal of destroying its territorial integrity and statehood. sovereignty, which made it obvious that the international community was not ready to protect the sovereignty of an internationally recognized state guaranteed by international law, which was especially denied by the introduction of an arms embargo, which prevented it from protecting its own sovereignty and territorial integrity. What was the role of the signatories of the Dayton Agreement in the preparation and execution of bilateral aggression against the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina with the aim of implementing plans for the partition of Bosnia and the realization of large-scale projects, and whether it determined their position as signatories to the General Framework Agreement? and the topic of trials of international courts with the aim of establishing, proving and convicting committed crimes. What is the significance of the signatories in the establishment and preservation of peace, and whether large-scale projects and plans for their implementation ended with the signing of the Dayton Agreement are questions whose answers are still being sought 25 years after the signing of the agreement. Namely, Slobodan Milosevic, the then president of the Federal Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), before the signing of the Dayton Agreement, appeared before the ICTY as an indictee for crimes committed in the Republics of the former Yugoslavia - Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Kosovo. The trial was not terminated due to the death of the accused, but the Trial Chamber rendered a decision on the motion for acquittal (Interim Judgment of the Hague Tribunal of 16 June 2004), which established his responsibility for genocide committed in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Franjo Tudjman, the then President of the Republic of Croatia, was identified as a participant in a joint criminal enterprise in a verdict handed down for crimes committed by the Croatian Army (HV) and the Croatian Defense Council (HVO) against the civilian population of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Case IT-04-74 Prlić etc). In its appeal verdict against the Bosnian six, the ICTY Appeals Chamber found that there was an international armed conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the state of occupation, but also confirmed the existence of a Croatian joint criminal enterprise aimed at "ethnic cleansing" certain areas of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Croatia's Franjo Tudjman as one of the participants in this JCE. Thus, persons who found themselves in court proceedings and were held responsible for the consequences of the policies they implemented, the commission of crimes and joint criminal enterprises realized in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, became signatories of the Dayton Peace Agreement and guarantors of peace.

206-232

Authors: Sead Selimović

The armed aggression against the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina ended with the signing of the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Dayton Agreement), initialed in Dayton on November 21, 1995, and signed on December 14, 1995 in Paris „in Bosnian, Croatian, English and the Serbian language“. The Dayton Agreement confirmed the fact that the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had real control (power) over the so-called Republika Srpska. Annex 4 of the Dayton Agreement determined the internal structure of Bosnia and Herzegovina. There are two entities in the internal structure of Bosnia and Herzegovina: the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which consists of 10 cantons, and the Republika Srpska. Apart from the two entities, there is also the Brčko District of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which was created by the Decision of the International Arbitration Court. It was established on March 8, 2000. According to the Dayton Agreement, the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, whose official name became „Bosnia and Herzegovina“, continues its legal existence under international law as a state with its internationally recognized borders. It remains a member of the United Nations, and as Bosnia and Herzegovina may retain membership or request membership in organizations within the United Nations system and in other international organizations. The Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Annex 4 of the Dayton Agreement) guarantees human rights and „fundamental freedoms“. Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Entities, according to the Constitution, will ensure „the highest degree of internationally recognized human rights and fundamental freedoms.“ For this purpose, the formation of the Commission for Human Rights is also envisaged, as provided for in Annex 6 of the General Framework Agreement. The issue of the return of refugees and displaced persons is addressed in Annex 7 of the Dayton Agreement, entitled „Agreement on Refugees and Displaced Persons“. According to Annex 7, all refugees and displaced persons have the right to return freely to their homes and have the right to restitution of property confiscated from them during hostilities since 1991 and to receive compensation for all property that cannot be returned to them. The „Agreement“ states that the return of refugees and displaced persons is an important goal of resolving the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In the period 1995-2020. The authorities of the Bosnian-Herzegovinian entity of Republika Srpska did not give up on the project of „separation of peoples“. The implementation of Annex 7 of the Dayton Agreement has been obstructed in various ways: by killings, beatings, intimidation, attacks on religious buildings and in other ways. Obstructions in the implementation of Annex 7 were also carried out in the entity of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, this was not as pronounced as in Republika Srpska. The first return of displaced persons (refugees and displaced persons) was to the settlement of Mahala, which until the Dayton Agreement was located in the municipality of Kalesija and after Dayton in the municipality of Osmaci in the entity of Republika Srpska. It was August 24, 1996. This was followed by the return of Bosniaks to the settlements of Jusići and Dugi dio in the municipality of Zvornik and Svjetliča in the municipality of Doboj. These events also marked the official start of the implementation of Annex 7 of the Dayton Peace Agreement in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Although the Dayton Agreement guaranteed the return of the exiles, everything went much harder on the ground, and there were also human casualties. Between 1992 and 1995, approximately 2.2 million people in Bosnia and Herzegovina were forced to flee their homes as a result of the war against Bosnia and Herzegovina. About 1.2 million people have applied for refugee protection in more than 100 countries around the world, while countries in the region have accepted about 40% of the total number of refugees from Bosnia and Herzegovina. Almost one million people were internally displaced in Bosnia and Herzegovina. At the beginning of 2003, the Strategy of Bosnia and Herzegovina for the Implementation of Annex 7 of the Dayton Agreement was adopted. It was the first, at the level of the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina, harmonized, framework document which sets goals and plans the necessary actions and reforms towards the final implementation of Annex 7 of the Dayton Agreement. According to the 2015 UNHCR Annual Statistical Report, the number of refugees from Bosnia and Herzegovina outside the country was 18,748. Of these, 9,080 had refugee status in Serbia, 4,055 in France, 2,274 in Switzerland, 1,412 in Germany, and the remaining number in other countries. It is estimated that at the end of 1995 there were about one million displaced persons, accounting for almost a quarter of Bosnia and Herzegovina's pre-war population. The first comprehensive, official census of displaced persons in Bosnia and Herzegovina was conducted at the end of 2000, when 557,275 displaced persons were registered. The 2005 audit of the status of displaced persons identified 186,138 displaced persons in Bosnia and Herzegovina. According to the data of the Ministry of Human Rights and Refugees from 2016, there were 98,574 displaced persons in Bosnia and Herzegovina, of which 38,345 or 40.6% were displaced in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 59,834 or 58.8% in the Republika Srpska and 395 or 0.5% in the Brčko District of Bosnia and Herzegovina. In the ethnic structure of displaced persons, according to the head of household - families, 32.7% (10,667 families and 30,920 persons) are Bosniaks, 60.0% (19,565 families and 60,737 persons) Serbs, 6.7% (2,195 families and 6,374 persons) Croats and 0.6% (184 families and 542 persons) Others. According to the 2016 data of the Ministry of Human Rights and Refugees, by the end of 2016, around 341,000 housing units had been built or renovated in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In the Bosnian entity of Republika Srpska, the Bosnian language is denied. Teaching in the Bosnian language is prohibited, and the language is called the non-existent Bosniak language. This discriminates against students who want their language to be called Bosnian. In addition, high-ranking officials from the Republika Srpska in public appearances deny the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Bosniaks as a people, deny genocide against Bosniaks, which affects the perspective of the people of this area. Streets in cities bear the names of war criminals from the Second World War and the period of aggression against the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, busts of war criminals are being built, schools and other state institutions are being „sanctified“, etc. In the period 1995-2020. Annex 7 of the Dayton Agreement was not fully implemented in 2006, as an important factor in the reintegration of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the recognition of the results of armed aggression and genocide against Bosniaks.

250-282

Authors: Vedad Gurda, Dževad Mahmutović, Maja Iveljić

The armed conflicts in Bosnia and Herzegovina in the period from 1992 to 1995, which ended with the conclusion of the so-called The Dayton Peace Agreement was marked by serious violations of fundamental human rights and freedoms and the commission of horrific war crimes. Prosecution of defendants for these crimes takes place at several levels, ie before: a) the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), b) domestic courts and c) courts of certain foreign states. The paper analyzes certain indicators related to the prosecution of these crimes, their scope and structure, as well as the ratio of convictions and acquittals for certain war crimes, the scope of application of conventional and summary forms of ending criminal cases and court policy of sanctioning perpetrators. It was learned that by the end of 2020, hundreds of criminal proceedings against approximately a thousand defendants had been completed. Most of the accused were prosecuted before the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Court of B&H), followed by the ICTY, and a slightly smaller number before the courts of the former SFRY and some Western European countries. The research established that before the ICTY, out of the total number of accused for war crimes committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as many as 90.2% were convicted of some of these crimes, while the rate of convicted in relation to accused before the Court of B&H was 67.2% , and before the courts in the Republic of Serbia 70.2%. It is interesting that before the ICTY as many as 24.3% of the accused were convicted in summary proceedings on the basis of a plea agreement, while before the Court of B&H 13,3% of the accused were convicted using a plea bargaining as a consensual model for ending criminal cases. So far, 22 people have been convicted of the crime of genocide as the most serious crime before the ICTY, the Court of B&H and German courts, and all convictions related to the activities of the Army of Republika Srpska during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Court of B&H, inherited a relatively mild policy of punishing war crimes. Finally, it was found that certain courts, especially Court of B&H, inherited a relatively mild policy of punishing war crimes.

302-337

Authors: Hazim Okanović

The main goal of this paper is to investigate the mechanisms of the influence of NGOs on public policy-making in Bosnia and Herzegovina after the signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement on December 14, 1995 in Paris. The sharp increase in the number of NGOs occurs immediately after the Dayton Accords, and according to some estimates, there were more than 1,500 at the time, which cannot be considered a large number when compared to the number of NGOs in other transition countries. Data from the Collective Register of Foundations and Associations in Bosnia and Herzegovina state that their total number is 25,646, while the number of actually active is difficult to determine. The literature so far has been presented from the non-governmental sector in Bosnia and Herzegovina to a significant extent for public policy making, as well as research results and these claims primarily based on the number of qualitative impact diaries of individual NGOs (case studies). This research paper aims at systematic research of the domain of influence of the non-governmental sector, through quantitative analysis of newly collected data on the influence of non-governmental organizations. The survey was proven at the local, cantonal, authorial and state level on a representative and stratified sample (10% - according to the statistical method) and was trained by the leadership and activists of non-governmental organizations and government officials (ministries and state administrative organizations). One of the main assumptions is that by successfully networking with organizations from neighboring EU member states, NGOs become a respectable actor in public policy-making in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In addition to quantitative analysis, this paper provides a detailed overview and theoretical analysis of civil society, NGO sector and public policies as well as a comparative insight into institutional and non-institutional mechanisms of NGO influence on public policy making in Bosnia and Herzegovina and their practical application in neighboring countries European Union. This paper contributes to a better understanding of the role of the non-governmental sector (association) in public advocacy and the analysis and comparison of current theories of the legal policy framework, structure, size, factors of development of the non-governmental sector. In addition, the paper contributes to the assessment of the current state of the mechanism of influence on the creation of public policy agendas in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the formulation of measures for internal structures and networking of NGOs and the definition of their number, structure and types. The problem of the research is reflected in the fact that the started processes of transformation and the unfinished process of transition of the Bosnian society and civil sector are, due to the war destructions, significantly slowed down. Changes in society in the pre-war phase created realistic preconditions for the development of the non-governmental sector and civil society in general, and provided a realistic basis for influencing the advocacy and creation of various public policies. In the post-war period, international donors invested heavily in the NGO sector. The subject of this research is the influence of the non-governmental sector on policy-making processes, through knowledge of institutional mechanisms, as well as the correlation of the non-governmental sector and public policies from the aspect of democracy development as an integral process in all its aspects. Given that this topic has previously been partially addressed in this context, through a systematic review of the problem and offering an adequate solution to the problem, it is necessary to re-examine the key issues. The key issues explored within this paper are how networking with neighboring EU Member States has a positive impact (has a positive association) on the importance of NGOs in advocating for public policies. In addition, the extent to which financial support from EU institutions has a positive impact on the importance of NGOs in advocating for public policies has been explored.

359-363

Authors: Semir Hadžimusić

Prikaz//Review: Sead Selimović, Za jedinstvo domovine i slavu dinastije. Školstvo u Bosni i Hercegovini za vrijeme Kraljevine Srba, Hrvata i Slovenaca, Centar za istraživanje moderne i savremene historije Tuzla, Tuzla 2021, 442 str.

371-377

Authors: Izet Šabotić

Prikaz//Review: Senaid Hadžić, Veliki zaokret: Bosna i Hercegovina u vremenu tranzicije (od 1880-ih do 1950-ih), Centar za istraživanje moderne i savremene historije Tuzla i Arhiv Tuzlanskog kantona, Tuzla 2021, 493 str.

382-384

Authors: Alen Zečević

Prikaz//Review: Emir Demir, Stanovništvo Kaknja u osmanskom periodu, Udruženje Kreativni centar za edukaciju i obrazovanje „Spektrum“, Sarajevo 2021, 187 str.

390-392

Authors: Omer Merzić

Prikaz//Review: Hikmet Karčić, Derviš M. Korkut: A Biography, El-Kalem i Institut za islamsku tradiciju Bošnjaka, Sarajevo 2020, 85 str.

403-415

Authors: Jasmin Jajčević

Aktivnosti Centra za istraživanje moderne i savremene historije Tuzla u 2020. godini // Activities of Center for Research of Modern and Contemporary History Tuzla in 2020.

51-69

Authors: IZET ŠABOTIĆ

The paper reviews the procedure of waqf formation of Tahira-hanuma Tuzlić, widow of Gradaščević from Tuzla. Based on the presented contents, this endowment (waqf) did not pass without certain difficulties. Namely, Tahira-hanuma Tuzlić comes from a well-known bey Tuzla family, and on that basis she inherited significant land holdings and numerous other real estates. She was married to Bećir-bey Gradaščević and they had no children. At the age of over 60, she decided to endow a significant part of her property in an “evladijet waqf”. Since Esad ef. Kulović, the mayor of Sarajevo, was married to Tahira-hanuma Tuzlić's sister, Rashid hanuma, he was appointed as mutevelija (guardian) of the said waqf. It was planned to include in the endowment significant land holdings located in the cadastral municipalities: Pasci, Husino, Bistarac and Donja Tuzla, as well as several houses and shops in Donja Tuzla. Bakir-beg Tuzlić, the only male descendant of the prominent bey family Tuzlić at the time, opposed this endowment. When he found out about the endowment, Bakir-bey Tuzlić tried in every possible way to prevent the same. For these reasons, he addressed the Sharia Court in Tuzla, the Village District Office of Donja Tuzla, and later the Provincial Government for Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Joint Ministry in Vienna. In the above-mentioned petitions, Bakir-bey Tuzlić pointed out that he had learned from the Bazaar conversations that his aunt Tahira-hanuma Tuzlić had planned to endow most of the property she owned. In his explanations, he pointed out that she was doing it outside the law and domestic customs, all with the aim of preventing him, as the closest descendant of the respectable Tuzlić family, from reaching his inheritance. In addition, he stated that in the past few years, his aunt Tahira-hanuma Tuzlić has been behaving wastefully, giving away parts of her property without a valid reason. He especially pointed out the unjustified donation of a large property in the village of Dubravice in the Brčko district, as well as other property of Esad ef. Kulović, which Bakir-beg Tuzlić objected to, because he believed that Esad ef. Kulović has an obligation to Tahiri-hanuma, and not she to him, because thanks to Tahiri-hanuma Tuzlić, he married her sister Rashid hanuma and thus inherited significant property. In his petitions, Bakir-beg Tuzlić pointed out that Tahira-hanuma Tuzlić was a mother-in-law and that she was not capable of making valid decisions, which could put her in an unenviable position. In addition, he said that she was doing it in spite of him, so that he would not have the said property, as the only male heir. After the Sharia Court and the Village District Office in Donja Tuzla rejected Bakir-beg Tuzlić's requests, he addressed the Provincial Government for Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Joint Ministry of Finance in Vienna. But neither did they have an understanding for his pleas. Simultaneously with the requests of Bakir-beg Tuzlić, Tahira-hanuma Tuzlić addressed these same institutions, asking them for consent to endow the property in the “Evledijet waqf of Tahira-hanuma Tuzlić”. After the above-mentioned institutions determined that there were no obstacles to the endowment, the Provincial Government finally, on November 2, 1907, gave approval for the endowment of the said property. The process of endowment was confirmed at the Sharia Court in Tuzla by a waqfnama, which appointed the mutevelija “Evladijet vakuf Tahire-hanume Tuzlić”, and established the rules of its use for humanitarian, religious-educational and economic-social purposes. In this way, this waqf was given to the community for use, and it served its intended purpose for several decades, until the establishment of communist rule after World War II, when this waqf, like many others in Bosnia and Herzegovina, came under fire from numerous processes. This waqf is interesting for several reasons. It was one of the larger waqfs created in Austro-Hungarian times, and behind the said waqf stood a woman as a waqif. Therefore, we considered it important to give some important facts related to the procedure of endowment of the endowment, and to point out some important characteristics of the same.

87-101

Authors: DENIS BEĆIROVIĆ

Based on archival material and relevant literature, this text analyses and presents the activities of the labour movement in Bosnia and Herzegovina in the first years after the end of the First World War. During this period, the struggle for workers'rights, mostly through strike actions, resulted, among other things, in an increase in wages, the introduction of eight-hour working days in most companies, the exercise of the right to elect workers' commissioners and trade unions. The workers managed to get other benefits related to the economic position of the workers, such as retail co-operatives, apartments, assistance in purchasing work suits, etc. Workers' representatives fought for a radically better position and a new place in society. In addition to eight-hour working days, higher wages and other demands to improve the material position of workers, strikes against the political disenfranchisement of workers were conducted during this period, as well as for political freedoms and democratisation of political life in the country. During 1919 and 1920, several strikes about pay were organised by miners, construction workers and metalworkers in the forest industry, catering workers and employees in Sarajevo, Tuzla, Bijeljina, Brčko, Zenica, Breza, Mostar, Zavidovići, Dobrljin, Lješljani, Maslovarama and Rogatica. It was part of over 125 strikes by workers in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the period of legal activity of the Socialist Labour Party of Yugoslavia (SLPY) (c), i.e. the Communist Party of Yugoslavia (CPY) and its close trade unions. At the initiative of the SLPY (c) and united syndicates, public political assemblies were organised in Sarajevo, Tuzla, Zenica, Mostar, Brčko, Derventa, Vareš and Drvar, at which demands were put forward to dissolve the authorities, and organise democratic elections for the Constituent Assembly and demobilise the army. The aggravation of the political situation in the first post-war years was noticeable in many local communities in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In a number of cities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, there were physical confrontations between workers and security bodies of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. One such example occurred, in Zenica in mid-October 1920, when police banned the Communists' attempt to hold an assembly despite a previously imposed ban. On that occasion, the gathered mass of 2,500 workers refused to disperse and demanded that the assembly be held. After the police and the gendarmerie tried to disperse the gathered workers, there was open conflict. Workers threw stones at security officials, and they responded by firing firearms. The rally was eventually broken up, one worker was wounded and twelve workers were hurt during a clash with police. Owing to the increasing engagement of workers' representatives, the political situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina worsened. It was not uncommon to have open conflicts between workers and government officials. After the collapse of the Husino uprising, the position of workers deteriorated. Also, this paper discusses the impact of the revolutions in Eastern and Central Europe on the labour movement in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

130-145

Authors: MARIYANA STAMOVA

The paper focuses on the events after the Brioni plenum of the Central Committee of the LCY in 1966. The turning point for the development of the national relationships in the Yugoslav federation became namely the Brioni plenim. This plenum and its decisions led to a liberalization of the national relationships in Yugoslavia, thus to the outburst of the Albanian problem, which was severely suppressed to this moment. This is the first major victory for the Albanians in Yugoslavia. In this regard, a movement has begun among the Albanian population in the multinational federation with the main goal of achieving full national recognition, including republican status for Kosovo. This new policy towards the minorities in Yugoslavia was introduced after the middle of the 1960s. Its expression became the new constitutional definition of “Yugoslav peoples and ethnoses”, which had to substitute the term “national minorities”. That led to changes into the rights of Albanians in Yugoslavia, and as a result their socio-political activity drastically aroused. The Yugoslav party leadership started again to look for a solution of the Albanian issue. Significant Yugoslav financial aid and investments were directed towards Kosovo, aiming at a closer incorporation of the Albanians in the Yugoslav federation and an interruption of their connection with Albania. After the Brioni Plenum, the Albanian problem in the Yugoslav Federation entered a qualitatively new state. The events in the Autonomous Province of Kosovo and the neighboring Republic of Macedonia at the end of 1968 played an important role in the further development of this problem and in the changes in the constitutional, legal and socio-political development of the Yugoslav Federation. So after the demonstrations of the Albanian population in Kosovo and Macedonia at the end of 1968, a “creeping Albanization” started in Kosovo. The Albanian political elite and intelligencia played the most important role in the imposition of the “Albanization” as a political line at the end of the 1960s. Albanians hold all important posts in administration, culture, education and political life of Kosovo. That led to an increasing mistrust between the Albanian population and the Serbian-Montenegrin minority, and the last was forced to leave its homes and to migrate in other republics and regions. The political leadership in Prishtina insisted the autonomous region to get equal rights with the republics as a federal unit. That is how at the beginning of the 1970s Kosovo issue transferred into a problem of the whole Yugoslav federation, not only a Serbian one. The Albanians in Prishtina were involved into the confrontation Zagreb-Belgrade and acquired a support from the Croatian side, as well as the Slovenian one in the efforts to take their problem out of Serbia and to put it on a federal level at the League Communists of Yugoslavia (LCY) and the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY). The processes in the political life of the autonomous region Kosovo were not isolated and were connected with the events in the Yugoslav federation as a whole, and precisely in Croatia at the end of the 1960s and the beginning of the 70s, which culmination was so-called “Zagreb Spring” in 1971. The Croatian crisis had an important influence on the national relationships in the federation and led to an inflammation of the national disputes. That had a direct impact on the political life of Kosovo. Searching for allies against Serbian hegemony and unitarism, which were the main danger for the Croatian republic, Zagreb’s political leadership supported Kosovo pretensions for the extension of the autonomous rights and the freedoms of the Albanians. The amendments to the federal system of Yugoslavia (1968-1971) and the new Yugoslav constitution from 1974 are reflected in Kosovo, which makes the Albanian problem not only a problem of Serbia, but also a common Yugoslav problem.

163-187

Authors: AMIR AHMETOVIĆ

Bosnia and Herzegovina represents a very suitable experimental space for the analysis of integrative policy in the conditions, war and long-lasting crisis, of a devastated society which, due to the challenges of history, is deeply divided. In such a space, applying the analytical model designed and used by Seymour Lipset and Stein Rokan, the paper deals with the detection of social divisions that underlie party preferences in the 1990 elections for the Assembly of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Analyzes of pre-election and post-election activities of political entities show the existence of an important link between ethno-confessional characteristics and attitudes on political issues and party preferences, which in accordance with the used theoretical model creates preconditions for talking about social divisions that have turned into party divisions. It can be determined that they are bh. political parties formed, with all their specifics, on the basic lines of Bosnia and Herzegovina social divisions. In the analysis of the relationship between social and political space and the influence of the structure of society on political relations and divisions, it is possible to determine that party divisions and divisions, their segmentation and polarization are conditioned, above all, by the depth and dynamics of fundamental Bosnia and Herzegovina social divisions. The divisions that emerged in the pre-election period of 1990 (we can conditionally define them as divisions communism vs anti-communism) were pushed into the background in the first post-election year and priority was given to the split that S. Lipset and S. Rokan defined as the center-periphery split. (or the territorial-cultural split as, after adaptation, Professor Nenad Zakošek called it). The second part of the paper presents an overview of the most important political parties in the 1990 elections and continues to examine the applicability of S. Lipset and S. Rokan's theory of turning social divisions into party divisions, this time in the first year of ethno-confessional parties in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Analyzing the basic lines of historical ethnic and confessional divisions in Bosnia and Herzegovina society and in the sphere of political (sub) system through indicators such as: predominant (ethnic, confessional, linguistic, cultural and regional) identifications, the relationship between ethno-confessional and civil, the relationship to the rights and freedoms guaranteed in Bosnia and Herzegovina. According to the Constitution, the attitude towards different solutions to the state question (remaining in the common state of Yugoslavia vs. the independent Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina) tested the hypothesis that historical lines of ethno-confessional splits represent the basic determinant of political goals. It can be seen that the territorial-cultural divide (primarily in the form of center-periphery conflict) is actually a kind of complete split, given that it is a split that involves conflict between stable social groups (residents of the center and periphery but also members of different ethnic and confessional communities). In the Bosnia and Herzegovina case, these are (ethnic and confessional) communities that have different views on the most important issues of the social organization of the common state, which results in open conflict on the political scene in the form of voting for different political options, which can be transformed by ethnopolitical elites. (very easily) into various forms of violence against others and different in the territory that is under their political (and police) control.

217-234

Authors: MESUD ŠADINLIJA

The presence of regular Yugoslav military forces in central Podrinje and their participation in the aggression against Bosnia and Herzegovina have been evident from the very beginnings. As there were no significant forces of the Yugoslav People’s Army in Bosnian Podrinje, in the beginning of April 1992 the 336th Motorized brigade was dislocated from the area of Tuzla and it established its command post in Šekovići, thus becoming the bearer of battle activities and organization of the Army of the Serb Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina in this region, including in its organic composition all Serb armed formations from Zvornik, Kalesija, Šekovići, Vlasenica, Milići, Bratunac and Skelani. In the attacks during which the Serb forces gained control over a broader area of Central Podrinje, and the Bosniak population, which constituted a pronounced majority of the overall population, was suppressed and reduced to three isolated enclaves on the territory of Cerska, Konjević Polje and Srebrenica, the function of leading and commanding these forces, as well as other regular and irregular units which were directed or acted from the territory of Serbia, was conducted by the Operative group “Drina”, a formation under the command of the Belgrade military zone, later the 1st Army of the Yugoslav Army. In the attacks on the remaining enclaves of Podrinje during the summer and autumn of 1992 the aviation of the Yugoslav Army was employed along with lighter jets of agricultural aviation, as well as artillery from the firing positions of the Yugoslav Army on the territory of Serbia. The contents of the Wance-Owen peace plan, according to which the greater part of the Bosnian Podrinje was supposed to be included into one of the provinces with a Bosniak ethnic majority, which would have spelt the end of the Serb national policy in Podrinje, represented an announcement of a large winter offensive of the Serbian forces. With a directive issued on 19 November 1992 the Drina corps of the Army of Republika Srpska was ordered to defend Višegrad, Zvornik and the corridor towards Serbia with its main forces, to deblock the communication on the line Milići – Konjević Polje – Zvornik, and to exhaust the enemy on the broader area of Podrinje, inflict upon him as much loss as possible, and force him to “leave the areas of Birač, Žepa and Goražde together with the Muslim population”. On the basis of this directive act, the planned offensive military activities of the Serb forces in Central Podrinje, initiated during November and finished with the agreement on the demilitarization of Srebrenica in April 1993, according to the documents of the Army of Republika Srpska, had three successive phases codenamed: “PROBOJ” (Breakthrough), “PESNICA” (Fist) and “UDAR” (Assault). Despite the significant engaged forces, the offensive “PROBOJ” did not go according to plan, and in the counterattacks during December the forces of the Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina liberated a large number of settled places, and until 9 January 1993 gained control over Serb strongholds in the communication region of Bratunac – Kravica, and thus physically connected all parts of the liberated territory. Then a new offensive was launched, codenamed “PESNICA”, which, aside from the stabilization of the Serb defence of Bratunac, did not achieve its stated goals, while on the other side the forces of the Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina arrived to the part of the state border with Serbia in the region of Skelani. In the final phase of the offensive, that bore the code name of “UDAR”, the Army of Yugoslavia directly joined the fighting in Central Podrinje on the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina. From the direction of Bratunac towards Srebrenica the forces from the composition of OG “Drina” and parts of other units from the 1st Army of the Yugoslav Army were active, which established a command outpost in Ljubovija. In central Podrinje parts of the Special units corps of the Yugoslav Army also operated, and during the offensive they were stationed in the region of Skelani. From that side, from the direction of Skelani towards Srebrenica, the forces from the composition of the Užice corps of the 2nd Army of the Yugoslav Army were also active. When the forces of the Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina were suppressed from the larger part of the territory and together with the masses of Bosniak civilians restricted to the broader town area of Srebrenica, the units of the Yugoslav Army could retreat to the territory of their state. The offensive was concluded with the signing of the agreement about the demilitarization of Srebrenica

258-288

Authors: ADIB ĐOZIĆ

The relationship between identity and national consciousness is one of the important issues, not only, of the sociology of identity but of the overall opinion of the social sciences. This scientific question has been insufficiently researched in the sociological thought of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and with this paper we are trying to actualize it. Aware of theoretical-methodological and conceptual-logical difficulties related to the research problem, we considered that in the first part of the paper we make some theoretical-methodological notes on the problems in studying this phenomenon, in order to, above all, eliminate conceptual-logical dilemmas. The use of terms and their meaning in sociology and other social sciences is a very important theoretical and methodological issue. The question justifiably arises whether we can adequately name and explain some of the “character traits” of the contemporary national identity of the Bosniak nation that we want to talk about in this paper with classical, generally accepted terms, identity, consciousness, self-awareness, shame or shame, self-shame. Another important theoretical issue of the relationship between identity and consciousness in our case, the relationship between the national consciousness of Bosniaks and their overall socio-historical identity is the dialectical relationship between individual and collective consciousness, ie. the extent to which the national consciousness of an individual or a particular national group, political, cultural, educational, age, etc., is contrary to generally accepted national values and norms. One of the important factors of national consciousness is the culture of remembrance. What does it look like for Bosniaks? More specifically, in this paper we problematize the influence of “prejudicial historiography” on the development of the culture of memory in the direction of oblivion or memory. What to remember, and why to remember. Memory is part of our identity. The phrase, not to deal with the past but to turn to the future, is impossible. How to project the future and not analyze the past. On the basis of what, what social facts? Why the world remembers the crimes of the Nazis, why the memory of the Holocaust and the suffering of the Jews is being renewed. Which is why Bosniaks would not remember and renew the memory of the genocides committed against them. Due to the Bosniak memory of genocide, it is possible that the perpetrators of genocide are celebrated as national heroes and their atrocities as a national liberation struggle. Why is the history of literature and art, political history and all other histories studied in all nations and nations. Why don't European kingdoms give up their own, queens and kings, princesses and princes. These and other theoretical-methodological questions have served us to use comparative analysis to show specific forms of self-esteem among Bosniaks today. The concrete socio-historical examples we cite fully confirm our hypothesis. Here are a few of these examples. Our eastern neighbors invented their epic hero Marko Kraljevic (Ottoman vassal and soldier, killed as a “Turkish” soldier in the fight against Christian soldiers in Bulgaria) who killed the fictional Musa Kesedzija, invented victory on the field of Kosovo, and Bosniaks forgot the real Bosniak epic heroes , brothers Mujo and Halil Hrnjic, Tala od Orašac, Mustaj-beg Lički and others, who defended Bosniaks from persecution and ethnic cleansing in the Bosnian Krajina. Dozens of schools in Bosnia and Herzegovina have been named after the Serbian language reformer, the Serb Vuk Stefanović Karađić (1787-1864), who was born in the village of Tršić near Loznica, Republic of Serbia. Uskufije (1601 / 1602.-?), Born in Dobrinja near Tuzla. Two important guslars and narrators of epic folk songs, Filip Višnjić (1767-1834) and Avdo Medjedović (1875-1953), are unequally present in the memory and symbolic content of the national groups to which they belong, even if the difference in quality is on the side of the almost forgotten. Avdo Medjedovic, the “Balkan Homer”, is known at Harvard University, but very little is known in Bosnia and Herzegovina. And while we learned everything about the murderer Gavril Princip, enlightened by the “logic of an idea” (Hannah Arendt) symbolizing him as a “national hero”, we knew nothing, nor should we have known, about Muhamed Hadžijamaković, a Bosnian patriot and legal soldier, he did not kill a single pregnant woman , a fighter in the Bosnian Army who fought against the Austro-Hungarian occupation of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1878. When it comes to World War II and the fight against fascism are full of hero stories. For one example, we will take Srebrenica, the place of genocidal suffering of Bosniaks. Before the war against Bosnian society and the state 1992-1995. in Srebrenica, the elementary school was called Mihajlo Bjelakovic, a partisan, born in Vidrići near Sokolac. Died in Srebrenica in 1944. The high school in Srebrenica was named Midhat Hacam, a partisan born in the vicinity of Vares. It is not a problem that these two educational institutions were named after two anti-fascists, whose individual work is not known except that they died. None of them were from Srebrenica. That's not a problem either. Then what is it. In the collective memory of Bosniaks. Until recently, the name of the two Srebrenica benefactors and heroes who saved 3,500 Srebrenica Serbs from the Ustasha massacre in 1942, who were imprisoned by the Ustashas in the camp, has not been recorded. These are Ali (Jusuf) efendi Klančević (1888-1952) and his son Nazif Klančević (1910-1975). Nothing was said about them as anti-fascists, most likely that Alija eff. Klančević was an imam-hodža, his work is valued according to Andrić's “logic” as a work that cannot “be the subject of our work” In charity, humanitarian work, but also courage, sacrifice, direct participation in the fight for defense, the strongest Bosniaks do not lag behind Bosniaks, but just like Bosniaks, they are not symbolically represented in the public space of Bosnia and Herzegovina. We had the opportunity to learn about the partisan Marija Bursać and many others, but why the name Ifaket-hanuma Tuzlić-Salihagić (1908-1942), the daughter of Bakir-beg Tulić, was forgotten. In order to feed the muhadjers from eastern Bosnia, Ifaket-hanum, despite the warning not to go for food to Bosanska Dubica, she left. She bravely stood in front of the Ustashas who arrested her and took her to Jasenovac. She was tortured in the camp and eventually died in the greatest agony, watered and fried with hot oil. Nothing was known about that victim of Ustasha crimes. Is it because she is the daughter of Bakir-beg Tuzlić. Bey's children were not desirable in public as benefactors because they were “remnants of rotten feudalism”, belonging to the “sphere of another culture”. In this paper, we have mentioned other, concrete, examples of Bosniak monasticism, from the symbolic content of the entire public space to naming children.

307-312

Authors: DINO HAJDAR

Prikaz//Review: Dženita Sarač-Rujanac, Branko Mikulić: Politička biografija 1965-1989, Institut za historiju Univerziteta u Sarajevu, Sarajevo 2020, 557 str.

318-323

Authors: IZET ŠABOTIĆ

Prikaz//Review: Asmir Crnkić, Mirza Ahmetbašić, Bosanska Krupa u vrijeme austrougarske uprave, JU Arhiv Unsko-sanskog kantona Bihać, Bihać 2020, 246 str.

328-330

Authors: OMER MERZIĆ

Prikaz // Review: Zajim Kruško, Mesnevihan i dobrotvor Hadži Mujaga Merhemić, Stolac, Centar za istraživanje i unaprijeđivanje duhovne i kulturne baštine u Bosni i Hercegovini, Stolac 2019, 218 str.