the Balcan wars!!!!!!

It seems to me that the Balcan peninsula has been the most war-wealthy region threwout history if you can say it like that. Especially the 20th century has been bloody and horrific. My brain knows that there has been ethnic cleansing of muslims and that almost every nation there was at war with the other, but i am sure some of you dear forumers know the reasons of a certain nationalities there attacking the other and what has made them hate eachother so viciously. Is it the years of war.....??? Who has a grudge against who and when? Is it an after-effect of the Ottoman rule on the Balcans or the fault of the U.S.S.R.? It could be a long post to explain the entire peninsulas bloody history of the 20th century or atleast the events taken place after the collapse of the U.S.S.R., but do your best. The  entire thing in the Balcans is so mixed to me, do help me. 

I really must say southeastern EUrope is and has always been insane.  Maybe they are angry that they dont havemuch sucess compared to everyone else, and so take it out on each other (as they would be destroyed if they attacked anyone else and no one outside the Balkans really seems to care about what ghoes on there.)

You all have good points.  To this I would add that the Balkans are a very rugged region, which tends to fragment ethnic groups, rather than allow them to settle in one place.  We have a similar situation in another place with a nasty reputation, Southeast Asia, where the dominant groups (Burmese, Vietnamese, Thais, Khmers, etc.) took the best land, namely the river valleys, while dozens of minority tribes are scattered through the jungles and mountains that make up most of the region.

The result is that there is no way to draw frontiers in the Balkans without having part of some ethnic group caught on the wrong side of the line.  In the case of Yugoslavia, Josip Broz Tito solved the problem by discriminating in favor of the non-Serbs.  Tito's Yugoslavia had Serbs in Bosnia and Croatia, but no Bosnians or Croats in Serbia.  It worked for his lifetime, anyway.

Perhaps a picture would explain it better.  Here is a map of showing the ethnic makeup of eastern Europe in 1914 (There have been changes in the 90 years since then, of course, but the problem's still there):


The different groups within the empire of Austria-Hungary (called "Osztrak-Magyar" here, it's a Hungarian-language map) are represented by these colors:

• Germans = cobalt blue
• Czechs = gold
• Slovaks = tan
• Poles = brown
• Ukrainians = olive green
• Magyars = red
• Romanians = purple
• Serbs = light orange
• Croats and Bosnians = yellow
• Slovenes = dark orange
• Italians = dark blue (but only in the lower left, the dark blue spots in the upper right represent Jews)

Otto von Bismarck didn't live to see World War I, but he correctly guessed what would cause the next big war in Europe:  "Some damned foolish thing in the Balkans."

Originally posted by Kalevipoeg It seems to me that the Balcan peninsula has been the most war-wealthy region threwout history if you can say it like that. Especially the 20th century has been bloody and horrific. My brain knows that there has been ethnic cleansing of muslims and that almost every nation there was at war with the other, but i am sure some of you dear forumers know the reasons of a certain nationalities there attacking the other and what has made them hate eachother so viciously. Is it the years of war.....??? Who has a grudge against who and when? Is it an after-effect of the Ottoman rule on the Balcans or the fault of the U.S.S.R.? It could be a long post to explain the entire peninsulas bloody history of the 20th century or atleast the events taken place after the collapse of the U.S.S.R., but do your best. The  entire thing in the Balcans is so mixed to me, do help me.

Firstly,it should never be forgetten that The Balkan Peninsula is the backgarden of Europe..Who rules the Balkans who could threat Europe and Russia as well...

Therefore,this important area always have been a region to make horse run.

There has always been a prejudice,maybe dislike and mistrust  among communities in this region...As you know,during times of war,prejudices boom...and as if each nation had his eye on other soils...Just compare to first balkan war and the second to each other...In the first,everyone together fought against the Ottoman Empire..but 1 year later everyone including the Ottoman Empire   was fighting against the Bulgarians...see?

i can certainly assert that the real Ottoman rule was not seen in the 19.century..Ottoman forces spent their time chasing komitadjis from different nations on the balkan mountains..while leaving this region,we Turks really suffered a lot.The deportation of the Balkan Turks resulted in great pain ways..Maybe thats why noone could share the legacy of the ottoman empire as they wanted and the legacy of ottoman empire didnt make them happy!!!!

Your U.S.SR point is good...but it was not actually their fault..after an ideology ended,another one had to be found...and this time it was a hevay nationalism...

Also serbian memorandum of 1986 ..i think its social psychology effects can be considered in serious meanings...

This kinda sums up what happened: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslav_wars

Wow... old thread.... sort of.

One of the main reasons that warfare was (note the was, many countries in the region have moved away from this kind of behaviour) that the region is a crossroads.

This kind of warfare among the Balkans is old... very old.  Beginning with the tribal and city warfare with the Thracians and Greeks, the Greeks against the Persians, Thracians against the Romans, Dacians against southern Thracians, etc. etc.

Even during the time when the Byzantine Empire ruled most of the Balkans, there was really no internal peace.  Slavs migrated into the Empire and were discriminated.  Thracians fought to preserve their independance, finally becoming mixed in with the Slavs.  Meanwhile, throughout the passage of time, migrating and marauding peoples and armies continuously crossed the Balkans.  The Goths, the Huns, Avars, etc.

When the Bulgars came and formed Bulgaria, the Byzantine Empire continuously tried to regain its lost lands.  Even when during the first century of Bulgaria's existance the Bulgars and Slavs defeated the Byzantines numerous times, the Greeks would not give up.  This bred a lot of mistrust in the region.  The Bulgar Hans, Knias's, and Tzars did not trust the Byzantines because the Byzantines would regularly attack Bulgaria in order to regain their lost lands.

Then comes the question of Serbia.  A long time ago, it was said that there weren't any brothers more alike than Bulgaria and Serbia who hated each other more.  The Serbs were another Slav tribe, which formed a Kingdom 200-300 years after the Bulgarians.  Seeing a potential ally against the Bulgarians, the Greeks hired, bribed, persuaded (take your pick) the Serbs to attack Bulgaria from the behind while the Byzantines attacked from the south.  This bred even more mistrust.  In the same way, the migrating Magyars were persuaded to attack Bulgaria by the Byzantine Empire, and while they were repulsed, they settled on Bulgarian lands, and created more hate.

Now, also the Croatians and the Slovenians come into the picture.  Croatia contained Slovens in their kingdom, who later were fueled into trying to gain independance.

Hmm... will write more later, I have to go.  Hopefully this is beginning to answer your questions.

Thanks Kubrat. I don't know Balcan history in detail, but I just have a grasp of basic conflicts/events.

Edited by Evildoer

No, but it's interesting to read the Bulgarian perspective

Post the Greek perspective, it'd be interesting to read that too .  Besides, it's not an official opinion or anything like that, it's just my opinion .

Its weird that there seem to have been only Slavs coming to the peninsula centuries after centuries of migrating!!

Well, not only Slavs, Romanians (they claim descendancy from the Dacians), Albanians (who claim descendancy from the ancient Illirijans), Turks, Slavs, Greeks (of course ), Macedonians are in reality Slavs.  Depending on where you end the Balkans, there is also the Magyars (Hungarians), etc.

You have to remember that it is the dominant ethnicity which remains.  So maybe you had the Tatar invasion, they were assimilated (to an extent), the Bulgars were assimilated into the Slavs (although some north-eastern villages in Bulgaria carry very close resemblance to them) , Thracians into Slavs, Macedonians into Greeks, and so forth.

Also, many Turks are actually Turkecized Greeks, Bulgarians, etc.  I don't say this to offend any of our Turkish friends here, it is just that the local populations get assimilated into the more numerous ethnicity usually.

Originally posted by Kubrat Well, not only Slavs, Romanians (they claim descendancy from the Dacians)

AFAIK the reason why Romanians speak a Romance language is that all Dacians have been killed by the Romans. After the conquest Dacia became populated by Romans, and out of them originated the Romanians.

But the Kap�kulu were not allowed to marry. When they were allowed, the Dev�irme system was no longer used and most Kap�kulu were Turkish.