Ivanka Vasilevska

The historical state-legal development of Germany in many ways is specific, because although the German state was created after the Franco-Prussian war of 1871, certain announcements and elements of its statehood existed even before its official creation. With the Paris Peace Aagreement of May 30, 1814, German states were declared autonomous and joined forces in a federal alliance. The decisions of the Vienna Congress of 1815 were regarded as the fundamental law of the German Union, and its regulation was envisaged by the German federal acts, which in a small part were altered by the Viennese federal acts of 1820. In the second half of the 19th century the conditions for the national formation of Germany matured, and this was largely the merit of the Prussian chancellor Otto von Bismarck. His goal was to unite Germany around Prussia and for that purpose he used manipulation, diplomacy and power. At the end of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century, the strengthene...

Трудот ги анализира резултатите од периодот на Првата светска војна.Очигледно е дека овие состојби влијаеле на промените на Југозападниот дел од Балканскиот Полуостров, воедно предизвикувајќи ги интересите на Турција, Италија, Грција и
Бугарија. Како пример, со договорот од Севр беше очекувано дека Источна Тракија и регионот на Смирна би се инкорпорирале во територијалното проширување на Грција, на што остро се спротивстави револуцијата предводена од Кемал Ататурк. Тоа беа причините за почетокот на грчко-турската војна која што започна во март 1921 година. Што се однесува до Бугарија со Нејскиот договор Западна Тракија беше одвоена од неа и
ѝ беше дадена на Грција. Единствената добивка за Бугарија, како поразена страна во војната, беше гарантираниот излез на Егејското Море. Самиот чин на потпишувањето на Париските мировни договори за Балканските прилики неспорно имаа две значења.
Првото беше содржано во фактот дека со нив беше реализирана поделбата на Отоманските и на Австро-Унгарските поседи на Балканскиот Полуостров. Второто значење беше тоа што со Париските мировни договори се случи ревизија на Букурешкиот мировен договор од 1913 година и со тие одлуки со кои балканските држави се стекнаа со територијални добивки и со овие акти беа зацементирани на подолг временски период.

Enlightened absolutism represents a state policy which is implemented by the European forces in the duration of the 18th century. The chronological line of the enlightened absolutism covers the period of almost a half of century, from 1740 until 1789 i.e. to the start of the
French revolution. The enlightened absolutism is a movement within the absolutism which follows after autocracy (fascism) and precedes the despotism. As founder and ideologist of the Enlightened absolutism is considered Thomas Hobbes with his master piece the Leviathan.The Leviathan according to Hobbes is a sovereign state power (the best form for him is absolute monarchy), which is needed in order to compel people of their obligations. The philosophy of this policy amounts to postulate which stipulates that the social reforms are possible but only through the state and for the state, this phenomena are social expression of the state interest and the state is the only possible protector of fundamental rights and freedoms of the man and the citizen is the state. In other words, according to the Enlightened absolutists (adherents of the absolute monarchy) ‘welfare in society “is possible only and only through the state and the regime that was established by the same. Because of all above mention, our interest in this paper is to explain the basic goal of the ideas of the enlightened absolutism.

Почнувајќи од барањето за автономија, па сѐ до
варијациите за федерално или конфедерално
конструирање, сите тие обиди имаа свое влијание
кое доведе до соединувањето во единствениот
антифашистички блок за време на Втората светска
војна, во која македонскиот народ на заседанието на
АСНОМ ја доби и првата голема битка за
државотворност, пришто конечно се здоби со
шансата за започнување на процесот на решавање на
македонското прашање. Повеќедецениската борба од
страна на македонското национално револуционерно
движење, беше длабоко проткаена со визијата на
великанот на македонското народно-ослободително
дело, Гоце Делчев кој несомнено ги постави
темелите и највисокиот дострел на Организацијата,
кој се состоеше во ослободувањето на Македонија и
во борбата за создавање на самостојна, независна и
суверена држава Македонија.
Оваа борба за зачувување на неговиот идеал за
Македонската национална држава, трае до ден денес.

The nationalism in 19th century was directed in the first place towards the conviction that every nation is special by the fact that it has only one original language, by which can be clearly determined the ethnical expression of being a part of a certain nation. The second very important factor was contained in the insistence of researching the history of the peculiar nation, and also the research for fairy-tales and fables. The leaders of the national revival upon the basis of the historical occasions and the awareness about the question for the identity of the Macedonian nation, indicates two tendencies of fundamental importance, which are gathered around the idea of the historical past of Macedonia, and which are expressing the Macedonian national consciousness for: the antic Macedonian and the new Slavic tradition. The first expressed through the spontaneous verbal tradition through the centuries, for the origin connected with the great Macedonian antic kings, mostly with the myth of Alexander the Macedonian - called the Great, and the second which was representing the historical past of the Slavs, connected and built upon the antic Macedonian folklore and cultural genesis.

The historical and structural relationship between the Church and the Byzantine Empire form an important tradition. However, this topic is equally tradi-tional, as it is current, especially in Europe. It addresses a particularly complex problem which contains in itself the elements of the relation between the Church and the Byzantine Empire. Specifically, we analyze the historical, cultural, legal, political and ideological aspects of these elements. In the present state of our knowledge, the byzantine life is seen as marked by constant change, although at the same time there was loyal adherence to certain traditions governing the out-look of both Church and Empire. As regards the Byzantine Empire, a specific relationship between Church and State is characteristic, so apart from the ruler who was chosen by the Lord himself, the role of the religious head was limited to the spiritual functions i.e. to the preservation of the purity of faith within the Church. Despite of this character of the relationships, the Emperor also occupied a special place in the church service. This mode of action of the Byzantine Em-peror would later become known under the term of caesaropapism. It encom-passed in itself the entire Orthodox ecumene which obediently received it.

Legal protection of religious and linguistic identity
of non-Muslim population in the Millet System in
the Ottoman empire provided the non-Muslim elites
of this system the opportunity to gradually embrace
Western ideas of the nation and articulate political
aspirations of their ethnic or linguistig groups in
line with these ideas. Therefore in the age of dissolution
of the Ottoman Turkish empire and the age
of „Moderna“ in Slavic/Balkan states there were
created preconditions and circumstances for the
establishment and revival of ethnic and cultural
identities in former Ottoman Turkish Slavic and
other state-colonies.

Во Европа, 1990 година започна со голема доза на оптимизам. По паѓањето на Берлинскиот ѕид во 1989 година, повторно обединетата Германија беше решена да постигне своја сопствена внатрешна социо-политичка консолидација, но и натаму да го обединува и да го развива остатокот од Европа. Стана јасно дека социо-политичките услови во тоа време во Европа и во светот поставуваа предизвици пред статус-квото на Северноатлантскиот
договор и на Варшавскиот пакт. Како резултат на овие настани, советската идеологија во својот економски и воен аспект во времето на нејзиниот конечен колапс го загуби своето место во рамките на западниот свет и значително влијаеше врз развојот на источноевропската геополитичка сфера, која почна да заостанува.

The foundations of the system of international relations in the period
before of the Balkan wars, undoubtedly led to the creation of an international political situation which opened the possibility for major changes of the state borders in the Balkans. The interest of the Balkan states was the removal of the Empire from the Balkans and the redistribution of its territorial possession. Starting from the strategic interest of the economical benefits of the space, for the Balkan states was especially important to whom will this territory belong. The Balkan states based their arguments for their aspirations of the remaining Ottoman possessions on the Balkans on three main principles: the historical background, the ethnic composition of the population, and the necessity to maintain the balance between the forces. In the third argument was also included the idea for compensation. For these reasons, at the end of the first decade of the
XX-th century, the governments of Serbia, Montenegro, Greece and Bulgaria started an intensive diplomatic activity, to make military alliances, with ultimate goal - self-expansion through the parts of European Turkey. Starting from the above, our interest is to show the diplomatic activities of the Balkan states, and the position of the Ottoman Empire in the period from 1878 to 1913.

The great crisis and turning points that occurred in the Byzantine
Empire in 976 AD preconditioned the uprising known as the uprising of
the cometopuli. Spreading to a great extent the uprising resistance refused primarily the Bulgarian state administration, and then it directed towards the Byzantine hegemony at the Balkan Peninsula. In that way a new Kingdom was created which, led by King Samuel, formed the Macedonian medieval state.
Our interest in this study is directed towards analysis of the state and legal sources in the period of the classical feudalism, i.e. in the time of the fall of the great Samuel's state in 1018.

The period between the two world wars is
an era marked by permanent crises. During the period
between 1918 and 1940, merely a few years have
been stable and without any major military
interventions in the Balkans. For the critics of the
international system, known also as the balance of
power, World War I served as a proof that the same
system will eventually end in a military conflict. After
the end of the war, it became necessary to find new
ways which will prevent bloody outcomes in the future.
The solution was envisioned through the creation of
the first supranational organization which was
responsible for the maintenance of world peace. The
purpose of this research is to show how the doctrine
of collective defense has been incorporated in the
Covenant of the League of Nations and its impact on
braking the imperial aspirations of Germany and its
allies for nearly two decades and, at the same time,
how this doctrine became inoperative, thus paving the
way towards the start of World War II. Furthermore,
the topic of study in this paper will be the analysis of
outstanding national and territorial issues between the
two world wars, which contributed to the growing
instability of the political situation in Europe. For these
reasons, the decisions of the "Big Three" made in
Yalta in February 1945, carried the responsibility for
the regulation of the post-war world, and formed the
main basis for the creation of a bipolar system that
lasted for more than four decades.

In 1815, the four major European powers met in Vienna with a single purpose: “To ensure the final and irrevocable end of the Napoleonic hegemony!” Their mission was far from simple; however, they were strongly driven by the need to restore
the pride of the dynastic heritage which was violently usurped and devalued by the illegitimate French emperor. At that moment, regardless of their family connections, the representatives of England, Austria and Prussia hypocritically accepted the Russian Tsarist autocracy, embodied in the great Russian Tsar Alexander I who, in terms of the decisions that emerged from the Congress of Vienna (like Wilson in 1919), was the main protagonist and was certainly the creator of the informal union
called the Holy Alliance. In terms of the foreign policy of Tsarist Russia, this entire creation signified a stable terrain and a guarantee of its foreign policy plans aimed at the Ottoman Empire, as well as further expansion of its influence in the region of Southeast Europe, where
a substantial Orthodox population lived under Ottoman Sharia rule for several centuries. Given the circumstances, the Russian court was shocked to learn that, after the declaration of war against the Ottoman Empire in 1853, the Russian navy found itself standing against not only the Ottoman, but also the British and French naval forces, an unprecedented event in the autocratic era where, in wartime,
Christian countries sided with a Muslim country against another Christian country. Considering the reasons listed above, this paper aims at providing a comparative analysis of the decisions made at the Vienna Congress of 1815 in terms of the changes that conditioned the established balance of power in Europe. Additionally, we intend to compare the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca of 1774 with the decisions of
the Treaty of Paris of 1856, considering them the most adequate indicator of the geopolitical interests that will condition the international system throughout the 20th century.

The Ottoman Empire held the world stage for a period spanning more than seven centuries. Its greatness influenced and is still reflecting in the world history, particularly in the Southeast Europe. For the period which is object of our interest, it is important to underline the fact that great impact upon the decline was caused by the new revolutionary ideologies from the West and Russian empire from the East. The pulses coming from Russia with its hidden intensity of differences on religious ground, basically caused disturbances in the Empire which ended with a many treaties in the name of the promised "peace", which of course, did not last long enough. During the 19 th century within the enflamed passions of the Western European countries, the Ottoman Empire with its power and dimension did not manage to lead the political scene. The fluctuating alliances resulted in the empires "longest" century. Under the influences of the Great Powers the process of disintegration became unstoppable. The national revolutions within the Empire became more visible and effective by decade and new national states spawned in the Balkan Peninsula. Facing the new waves from the West influencing the national movements based on liberal-democratic ideals, the Empire felt the need of certain reform's in an attempt to stabilize the political order, desperately trying to adapt its ancient heritage to a new, modern era.

The historical state-legal development of Germany in many ways is specific, because although the German state was created after the Franco-Prussian war of 1871, certain announcements and elements of its statehood existed even before its official creation. With the Paris Peace Aagreement of May 30, 1814, German states were declared autonomous and joined forces in a federal alliance. The decisions of the Vienna Congress of 1815 were regarded as the fundamental law of the German Union, and its regulation was envisaged by the German federal acts, which in a small part were altered by the Viennese federal acts of 1820. In the second half of the 19th century the conditions for the national formation of Germany matured, and this was largely the merit of the Prussian chancellor Otto von Bismarck. His goal was to unite Germany around Prussia and for that purpose he used manipulation, diplomacy and power. At the end of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century, the strengthened German state and the increased industrial capital it possessed conditioned the demand for "its place under the sun" in the imperialist world politics, which surpassed its state borders. At a time when the colonial policies of the great and powerful states largely captured the springs and centers of imperial holdings in Africa and Asia, the belated birth of this gigantic state has problematized the balance of powers in Europe. The imperialist German project failed in 1918. For these reasons, this paper deals with the legal and political aspects of national Germany, from its creation to the Second World War.

In the second half of the XIX century on the Balkan political stage the Macedonian question
was separated as a special phase from the great Eastern question. Without the serious support
by the Western powers and without Macedonian millet in the borders of the Empire, this
question became a real Gordian knot in which, until the present times, will entangle and leave
their impact the irredentist aspirations for domination over Macedonia and its population by
the Balkan countries – Greece, Bulgaria and Serbia. The consequence of the Balkan wars and
the World War I was the territorial dividing of ethnic Macedonia. After the collapse of the
Ottoman Empire, the territory of Macedonia was divided among Serbia, Greece and Bulgaria,
an act of the Balkan countries which, instead of being sanctioned has received an approval,
with the confirmation of their legitimacy made with the treaties introduced by the Versailles
world order. Divided with the state borders, after 1919 the Macedonian nation was submitted
to a severe economic exploitation, political deprivation, national non-recognition and
oppression, with a final goal - to be ethnically liquidated. In essence, the Macedonian
question was not recognized as an ethnic problem because the conditions from the past and
the powerful propaganda machines of the three neighboring countries - Serbia, Greece and
Bulgaria, made the efforts to make the impression before the world public that the
Macedonian ethnicity did not exist, while Macedonia was mainly treated as a geographical
term, and the ethnic origin of the population on the Macedonian territory was considered
exclusively as a “lost herd”, i.e. as a nation which is either Serbian, Greek or Bulgarian. On
the account of this situation during the entire period between the wars, the Serbs, Greeks and
the Bulgarians were unified around the position through which they denied the existence of
the separate Macedonian identity. Serbia named the Macedonians in the Vardar part “South
Serbs”, Bulgaria claimed that the Macedonians were nothing else but purely Bulgarian
people, and Greece entitled the Macedonians to be “Slavophonic Greeks”, before finally
giving them the name “Bulgarians”. The Macedonian question fell under the shadow of the
oblivion by the great European powers which were the creators and signers of the
aforementioned international treaties. In this condition, the Macedonian question patiently
waited for the next chance to be re-actualized, until the ASNOM held on 2nd of August 1944.
It was exactly then where the statesmanship vision, which the Macedonian people carried
throughout all the changes and destiny’s temptations, got its expressive form with the
creation of federal Macedonia within the borders of the AVNOJ Yugoslavia.

Идејата да ја истражиме проблематиката поврзана со модерните
закани за човештвото произлезе од сознанието дека оваа област е исклучително дефицитарна во современата македонска
академска мисла. Од тие причини, заедно со истражувачкиот
тим од Институтот за политиколошки истражувања РесПублика
и Македонскиот политиколошки форум, формирани во рамките
на Правниот факултет „Јустинијан Први“ во Скопје, како институти кои се предводени од страната на моите најдобри студенти
– постдипломци и магистри на политички студии (Иван Иванов,
Станислав Цветковски, Сара Ал Бандер, Мартин Бузалковски,
м-р Ивана Атанасоска, Лилјана Лазаревска, м-р Марјан Вукчевиќ
и Џенур Исени), при неколкуте консултации кои ги одржавме,
констатиравме дека во Република Македонија, како и пошироко
на Балканот, па и на целата територија на Европа, постои сериозен недостиг од критички став кој академската јавност треба да
го гради во однос на кризните состојби и современите закани
за човештвото.