The Balkans. The Southeast Europe. The former Yugoslavia. Whatever you name it, there is no the exact term to meet the conditions in order to define the characteristics of the region in question. It is both hard and challenging task to impose the attributes of the people, the relations between them and, at the same time, not to offend anyone by using the terms mentioned. The region that is so easy to enjoy in and yet so hard to define changed its expressions so many times through the past centuries.

Even the terms changed their meanings, depending on the actual politics. For instance, if we call it the Balkans, the Croats and the Slovenians will immediately object, claiming that it colors their mentality in a pejorative manner. If we give it a try with the term of Southeast Europe, the Serbs, Bosniaks and Montenegrins will complain that it is the artificial term, with no other connotation than geographical. I do not find that the third term, the former Yugoslavia, would either suit it. That is because I simply cannot except that something that will soon become a part of the European future is described with a compound that contains a word ‘former’ in it.

Maybe the best solution is the one given and currently used by the European Union institutions and member states, referring to the Western Balkans as a region of Southeast Europe that is not in the European Union. I personally believe that the term was coined in a good manner, to look as a sort of a compromise in creating the state of minds that will adopt the necessity of contributing to the mutual European community only as a region.

…

Coming from Croatia, and when thinking about what to write on the topic of, it is almost impossible to give my thoughts on anything else than the Serbo‐Croatian relations. Yes, one might say, because of the well‐known animosity between the Croatian and Serbian people, which have resulted with the ongoing wars during the past century. That is a statement that I believe to be only partially true. To explain my initial doubt of where to begin with the reconciliation path of mine, it is necessary to show that the basic timeline of political encounters first began only at the end of the 19th century, which was followed by a strong ethnic conflict during the World War II and an actual war, which occurred during the 90‐es. Nevertheless, Croatia throughout its history had numerous examples of animosities with the other neighboring countries apart from Serbia (e.g. Italy, Hungary), none of which created a long lasting issue.

Furthermore, during the same period of time Serbia and Croatia shared their cultural, economical and social prosperity in being the essential bond of the various south Slavs entities formed in the 20th century. To remark that the alleged traditional animosity between Croats and Serbs is not the only historically recognized relation between the two, they is, with all the other nationalities in the socialist Yugoslavia involved, one of most bright example of multiethnic coexistence proclaimed by the famous Brotherhood and unity (Bratstvo i jedinstvo) doctrine. So the narration of the Serbo‐Croatian relations has much more to offer than a sort of a traditional myth of hatred. However, one cannot neglect the fact that almost anything regarding the conflicts between Croats and Serbs from the past is always the main media topic in Croatia and nothing gets the public atmosphere so electrified than almost any kind of interaction, positive or negative, between the two.

Searching for the answers of what made us, Croats and Serbs, come to this point when even the possible proposal of the reconciliation seems like mission impossible drove me to a dead end. Contrary to my aims, I have soon started using the way of thinking of those who stand on the opposite side of the reconciliation, the side that seeks no reconciliation, rather than to make new clashes.

–

Then I have realized, the positive way of dealing with the subject is to take into reconsideration not the potential problems and causes but the opportunities for a political cohabitation between Serbs and Croats. These are, for instance:

The similarity of languages that enables the people to communicate without any problems and need of translation;
Relatively large communities of each nation in the other country as potential diplomatic connection;
Mutual history with some significant persons belonging to both Serbia and Croatia;
Main and necessary mutual role of Croatia and Serbia as partners that will shown the way for the rest of the Ex‐Yugoslavia countries, except Slovenia, to the process of becoming the full European Union state member.
…

During the socialist Yugoslavia there was one, official Serbo‐Croatian language, standardized in the way that even now, 20 years after the dissolution, it is still being used in both countries as more or less the same language. Both countries share the main goal of becoming the part of the European Union, the Union that recognizes its diversity.

*This post includes only highlights from Marko Zunic’s essay.