지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Both Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia experienced two integrations and two breakups during the twentieth century. These two countries were born with the end of the First World War, experienced first disintegration of the state in the midst of the Second World War, and both countries re-started as an integrated state after the end of the Second World War. Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia showed other historical similarities in that they adopted socialist system in the process of their re-start, and that their federal state disintegrated with the collapse of the socialist system in Eastern Europe in the late twentieth century.
However, despite these historical similarities, these two countries showed totally different features in their second and final dissolution of socialist state. While Czechoslovakia peacefully disintegrated into Czech Republic and Slovakia in the process that is widely expressed as “velvet divorce” in their final dissolution, Yugoslavia passed through a violent process that is characterized by hostile war, genocide, and ethnic cleansing.
Two big factors resulted in the difference between the peaceful and the violent breakups in Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia. First is the superior nation’s way of treating the inferior nation(s) within a multi-national state. While in Yugoslavia the Serbs regarded other inferior nations as a means of creating a Greater Serbia and treated as such, the relationship between the nations in Czechoslovakia was not so tensioned. Second, whether the mobilization of nationalism by political elite was violent or not was also an important factor that made such a great difference between the two cases. Even though there may exist the background condition or the system condition of national conflicts, the inferior nation’s discontents do not automatically develop into a direct political action. For this to occur, the so-called “mobilization of grievance” is needed. Milosevic’s mobilization of Serbian nationalism was quite different from that of Klaus or Meciar in Czechoslovakia.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (33)
참고문헌 신청
Akhavan, Payam / 1995 / Yugoslavia, the Former and Future: Reflections by Scholars from the Region / The Brookings Institution
Bennett, Christopher / 1995 / Yugoslavia’s Bloody Collapse: Causes, Course, and Consequences / New York University Press
Bunce, Valerie / 1999 / Peaceful versus Violent State Dismemberment: A Comparison of the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia / Politics and Society 27 (2)
Cigar, Norman / 1995 / Genocide in Bosnia: The Policy of 'Ethnic Cleansing' / Texas A&M University Press
Connor, Walker / 1984 / The National Question in Marxist-Leninist Theory and Strategy / Princeton University Press
Bennett, Christopher / 1995 / Yugoslavia’s Bloody Collapse: Causes, Course, and Consequences / New York University Press
Bunce, Valerie / 1999 / Peaceful versus Violent State Dismemberment: A Comparison of the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia / Politics and Society 27 (2)
Cigar, Norman / 1995 / Genocide in Bosnia: The Policy of 'Ethnic Cleansing' / Texas A&M University Press
Connor, Walker / 1984 / The National Question in Marxist-Leninist Theory and Strategy / Princeton University Press
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0