M w IZZIVI PRIHODNOSTI w f Challenges of the Future ISSN 2463-9281. Izdajatelj / Publisher: Fakulteta za organizacijske študije v Novem mestu / Faculty of organization studies. Glavni in odgovorni urednik / Editor in chief: Uroš Pinterič. Uredniški odbor / Editorial board: • Boris Bukovec, Faculty of Organisation Studies in Novo mesto, Slovenia. • Alois Paulin, Technical University Vienna, Austria. • Juraj Marušiak, Slovak Academy of Science, Slovakia. • Anisoara Popa, Danubius University, Romania. • Raluca Viman-Miller, University of North Georgia, Georgia, USA. • Anna Kolomycew, Rseszow University, Poland. • Jurgita Mikolaityte, Siauliai University, Lithuania. • Patricia Kaplanova, Faculty of Organisation Studies in Novo mesto, Slovenia. • Laura Davidel, Univeristy of Lorraine, France. • Ana Železnik, Ljubljana University, Slovenia. • Marko Vulic, Information Technology School - ITS ComTrade, Serbia. • Vita Jukneviciene, Siauliai University, Lithuania. • Mitja Durnik, Ljubljana University, Slovenia. Naslov uredništva / Editorial address: Fakulteta za organizacijske študije v Novem mestu, Novi trg 5, 8000 Novo mesto, Slovenija. © Copyright Fakulteta za organizacijske študije v Novem mestu. Faculty of Organisation Studies. Vse pravice zadržane. All rights reserved. Revija Izzivi prihodnosti je prosto dostopna pod pogoji Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 licence. Članki so brezplačno dostopni. Journal Challenges of the Future is an open access journal distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 License. No article submission or article processing fees are charged. Kazalo / Contents Franc Brcar, Lea-Marija Colarič-Jakše Evaluation of cultural heritage in Posavje region by tourists and employees Vrednotenje kulturne dediščine v Posavju 1 Patricia Kaplanova Essay on legitimacy and democracy Esej o zakonitosti in demokraciji 16 Michal Franek Description of the most important wars, which took place on Balkan territory Opis najbolj pomembnih vojn, ki so se odvijale na balkanskem ozemlju 27 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 2, str. / pp. 1-26. Članek / Article Evaluation of cultural heritage in Posavje region by tourists and employees Franc Brcar Faculty of organization studies in Novo mesto, Ulica talcev 3, 8000 Novo mesto, Slovenia franc.brcar@gmail.com Lea-Marija Colaric-Jakse* Faculty of organization studies in Novo mesto, Ulica talcev 3, 8000 Novo mesto, Slovenia Landscape Governance College Grm Novo mesto, Sevno 13, 8000 Novo mesto, Slovenia lea.colaric-jakse@fos.unm.si Abstract: Purpose and Originality: This paper investigates tourism sustainability and examines the research problem of cultural and historical heritage sustainability in the Posavje region. The aim of this research paper is to evaluate the opinion of employees in tourist sector and tourists about tourism sustainability and their suggestions for improvement. The objective is to determine the level of sustainability of cultural and historical heritage. Method: Quantitative method with closed-ended questionnaire and qualitative method with open-ended questionnaire were used. Collected quantitative data were analyzed using frequency statistics, Spearman's correlation coefficient, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Qualitative data were analyzed by three steps: data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing/verification. Results: The results showed that maximizing benefits to cultural heritage and minimizing negative impact was rated more positively by tourists in comparison to employees in the tourist sector. The scores were rated between 2.72 and 4.05 on a scale from 1 (low level of sustainability) to 5 (high level of sustainability). Society: We conclude that the level of tourism sustainability in Posavje region is not satisfactory and has to be improved. Limitations / further research: Respondents proposed a great number of ideas for improving tourism sustainability. Keywords tourism, sustainable tourism, cultural heritage, tourism management. 1 Introduction In the highly demanding global market, the state as well as region must be economically successful and efficient. Slovenia is in the phase of transition, and is not an exception. It has to exploit all resources and potentials. In a broader sense, tourism is part of a national economy and has to be effective and also efficient. In order to achieve this objective, it has to exploit environmental, historical, cultural, archeological, spiritual, and other heritage. Slovenia had 9,590,642 overnight stays in 2015. Tourism sector has 103,500 employees, which represents 13% of all employees. It contributes 13% to the GDP and 7.1% to the total exports. Region Posavje had 625,525 overnight stays, which represents 6.5% of total overnight stays in Slovenia (STO Slovenija, 2015). According to statistics, Posavje region has 180,000 visitors annually and 6,500 employees in the tourist sector (Source: Statistical Office * Korespondencni avtor / Correspondence author Prejeto / received: 8. dec. 2016; revidirano / revised: 29. dec. 2016; sprejeto / accepted: 14. januar 2017. 1 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article of the Republic of Slovenia). According to these numbers, tourism is extremely important to the national economy, and also for the Posavje region. Sustainability is a term based on development and environment. It is a ratio between consumption and preservation of all sources. Sustainable development can be analyzed by three approaches: (1) economic; (2) environmental; and (3) socio-cultural. "Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" is sustainable development (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987, p. 43). Sustainable tourism is tourism without negative impact on economy, environment and society, where it is important to achieve the satisfaction of all players in tourism activities, community, employees, tourists, and so forth. Research in sustainable tourism is in progress. If tourism sector wants to be economically effective and efficient, it has to follow sustainable developmental trends. Traditional mass-tourism is transforming at the global level, therefore the change toward sustainable tourism is a necessity to remain in a demanding global market. Sustainable tourism represents global and local perspectives, and also is a challenge for the Posavje region. This paper investigates tourism sustainability and examines the research problem regarding cultural and historical heritage sustainability in the Posavje region, which is maximizing benefits to cultural heritage and minimizing negative impact of tourism on the community and environment. The purpose and objective of the research was to evaluate the actual situation regarding sustainability in the Posavje region. Is the level of tourism sustainability adequate or not? Additionally, the objective was to determine the opinion of tourists and employees in the tourism sector and determine the level of differences. Moreover, the goal also was to determine suggestions for improvement, based on employees' and tourists' opinions. We believe that experts from the tourism sector and guests are an unlimited source of developmental ideas. Janusz and Bajdor (2013, p. 529) predict that in a few years sustainable tourism will become traditional tourism. Sustainable tourism is a question about our existence and prosperity on the local and national level. The related works proposes different theoretical backgrounds and different research directions. Mihalic (2014) stresses discourse between sustainability and responsibility and proposes implementation in three phases: (1) awareness; (2) agenda; and (3) action. Begum, Alam and Sahazali (2014) emphasize three stakeholders groups: (1) government; (2) local residents; and (3) private entrepreneurs. Waligo, Clarke, and Hawkins (2013, pp. 347-351) propose a "multi-stakeholder involvement management" that is required for successful implementation; multi-stakeholder involvement management is composed by three strategic levels and six stages: (1) attraction; (a) scene-setting: effective communication, raise stakeholder perceived value of sustainable tourism; and (b) recognition of stakeholder involvement capacity: targeted stakeholder engagement, appropriate stakeholder engagement; (2) integration; (c) stakeholder relationship management: multi-level interactive networking, consolidate sustainability objectives; and (d) pursuit of achievable objectives: managing stakeholder adaptability, ensure opportunity optimization; and 2 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article (3) management of stakeholder involvement; (e) influencing implementation capacity: enhance practice and policy, increase degree of stakeholder involvement; and (f) monitoring stakeholder involvement: review, reward and rejuvenate, raise level of stakeholder motivation. To achieve the research objectives, two approaches were used: (1) a literature review; and (2) empirical investigation. The literature review was based on an extensive review of theory and literature including appropriate articles, books, and internet sites. The empirical study was composed of quantitative analysis (closed-ended questionnaire) and qualitative analysis (open-ended questionnaire). "The Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria" was used as a measure of tourism sustainability and hence, the research model was based on these criteria. Quantitative analysis included four questions or domains that represent indicators for measuring sustainability. Qualitative analysis was used to investigate employees and tourists opinion about tourism sustainability. Specific research interest of this paper was to determine suggestions in improving sustainability. 2 Literature review 2.1 Sustainable tourism A feature of sustainable tourism is rational use of resources. The most important is conservation of resources to assure long-term exploitation. Sustainable tourism is a form of sustainable development (Weaver, 2006, p. 10), where sustainable tourism involves the minimization of negative impacts and the maximization of positive impacts. The Tourism Sustainability Group published a report entitled: "Action for more sustainable European Tourism". The goal of the report is to promote measures to enhance the sustainability of European tourism. The twelve aims for sustainable tourism are (Tourism Sustainability Group, 2007, p. 45): (1) economic viability; (2) local prosperity; (3) employment quality; (4) social equity; (5) visitor fulfilment; (6) local control; (7) community wellbeing; (8) cultural richness; (9) physical integrity; (10) biological diversity; (11) resource efficiency; and (12) environmental purity. Commission of the European Communities prepared the "Agenda for a sustainable and competitive European tourism", which considers tourism as an economic activity that is very important to the EU. Tourism contributes 4% to EU's GDP, which represents from 2% to 12% in different countries (Commission of the European Communities, 2007, p. 2). Additionally, tourism offers job opportunities, especially for the younger population. UN (Commission on Sustainable Development) and OECD (Tourism Committee) support sustainable tourism on the global level, while at the regional level, EU (European Commission) is active. Slovenian government accepts and supports all activities and directives. In line with that, Slovenian key goals up to the year 2023 are to (Služba vlade Republike Slovenije za razvoj in evropsko kohezijsko politiko, 2015, p. 18): (1) increase the value of tourism by 15%, 3 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 2, str. / pp. 219-26. Članek / Article (2) increase the revenue from exports travel by 4 - 6% per annum and (3) increase energy efficiency in tourism facilities by 20%. Region Posavje is aware that cultural heritage has different development opportunities that have to be exploited. Such opportunities contributes to the development, not only in an economic sense, but also in a social, environmental and cultural aspect (Smid Hribar & Lapuh, 2014, p. 113). A coalition of 27 organizations, named "Partnership for Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria", developed a list of global sustainable tourism criteria with four main domains (Global Sustainable Tourism Council, 2013): (1) demonstrate effective sustainable management; (2) maximize social and economic benefits to the local community and minimize negative impacts; (3) maximize benefits to cultural heritage and minimize negative impacts; and (4) maximize benefits to the environment and minimize negative impacts. The study in this paper is focused in the third domain: maximize benefits to cultural heritage and minimize negative impacts that further contains four sub-domains. Maximizing benefits to cultural heritage and minimizing negative impacts that include four indicators noted here (i.e., independent variables): (1) Guidelines for visits - The organization follows established guidelines or a code of behavior for visits to culturally or historically sensitive sites, in order to minimize negative visitor impact and maximize enjoyment. (2) Historical and archeological artifacts - Historical and archeological artifacts are not sold, traded, or displayed, except as permitted by local to international law. (3) Protection of cultural heritage - The organization contributes to the protection and preservation of local historical, archeological, culturally, and spiritually important properties and sites, and does not impede access to them by local residents. (4) Incorporation of cultural heritage - The organization incorporates elements of local art, architecture, or cultural heritage in its operations, design, decoration, food, or shops; while respecting the intellectual property rights of local communities. These indicators are represented in the research model for this study (see Figure 1). Guidelines for visits Historical and archeological artifacts Maximizing benefits to cultural heritage and minimizing negative impacts Protection of cultural heritage Incorporation of cultural heritage Figure 1. Research model Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article Heritage can be classified as tangible and intangible. Prentice (1993) distinguish three categories of heritage: (1) historic and artistic: relics with physical/tangible characteristics; (2) scientific: elements drawn from birds, animals, rocks, etc.; and (3) cultural heritage: folk, fine arts, traditions, and languages. Timothy and Boyd (2003, p. 59) suggested different heritage attractions: (1) museums: arts, sports, music, industrial science, philatelic, and local history; (2) war sites and atrocities: battlefields, war graves, cemeteries, and memorials; (3) religious sites: pilgrimages and sacred sites; (4) living culture: traditions, ways of life, ceremonies, dances, agricultural practices, culinary habits, and arts and crafts; (5) festivals: focusing on culture and heritage; (6) industrial places: mines, quarries, factories, harbors, ports, agricultural relics, railroads and railway museums; and (7) literary sites: fictional and real-life places of authors and play-wrights. ICOMOS (2004) list is more detailed: (1) archaeological heritage; (2) rock-art sites; (3) fossil hominid sites; (4) historic buildings and ensembles; (5) urban and rural settlements/historic towns and villages; (6) vernacular architecture; (7) religious properties; (8) agricultural, industrial, and technological properties; (9) military properties; (10) cultural landscapes, parks, and gardens; (11) cultural routes; (12) burial monuments and sites; (13) symbolic properties and memorials; and (14) modern heritage. 2.2 Guidelines for visits The international, European, and national institutional initiatives significantly influence the creation, use, and spread of the concept of sustainable tourism, especially for the tourism sector (Torres-Delgado & López Palomeque, 2012, p. 9). Organizations have to adopt or self-prepare, use and monitor guidelines (i.e., a code of behavior) for visits that should be revised annually. This is vital for the protection and preservation of culturally or historically sensitive sites. Each visit has a negative impact and such a negative impact has to be reduced to a minimum. Sustainable tourism has to reduce the destination's vulnerability and increase resilience without negative impact on economic results, social quality of life, and the environment (Njoroge, 2014, p. 24). On the other hand, satisfaction of visitors should not be affected, but has to be improved. Guides have direct contact with visitors. The role of a guide is essential for sustainable behavior of visitors to protect the environment, property, as well as cultural and historical artifacts. Guides have to be properly informed and educated on sustainable tourism. Pereira and Mykletun (2012, p. 89) conclude that only the guides' contribution to sustainable tourism development is not sufficient. For this reason, negative impact is greater and tourists' satisfaction is smaller than it should be. All players involved in tourism activities have to contribute to achieve sustainability. 2.3 Historical and archeological artifacts Historical and archeological artifacts are national heritage, often of priceless value. Ritchie and Crouch (2004, p. 21) say that "The stock and condition of historical and cultural resources depends upon a nation's appreciation of their value and its ability to care for their condition. Government departments, trusts, arts councils, grants bodies and the degree of public patronage are examples of manifestations of support for cultural activities and the 5 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article cultural heritage of a destination." Trading is regulated by local and international law and has to be respected by all players in business and tourism. It should be able to check any historical and archeological artifacts before trading or putting on an exhibition. The tracking of sales must be established. 2.4 Protection of cultural heritage Heritage represents historical, archeological, culturally, and spiritual properties and sites. Individuals and organizations have to contribute to the protection and preservation of cultural heritage, with financial or non-financial support. Torres-Delgado and López Palomeque (2014, p. 130) stress the importance of measuring level of sustainable tourism on a municipal scale using three dimensions of indicators: (1) social dimension; (2) economic dimension; and (3) environmental dimension. They classified the indicator "Protected monuments and historic buildings" into social dimension. Slovenia is rich with castles, churches, and other historical buildings, so protection and preservation are essential for cultural heritage. The primary role of museums is protection, preservation, and exhibition work of art and historical artifacts. Another vital role is contributing to sustainable development. Inadequate legislation, insufficient human resource training, and uneducated management with regard to sustainable museums are factors that impede sustainable change in museums (Pop & Borza, 2015, p. 128). 2.5 Incorporation of cultural heritage Advertising and marketing are essential for success. Organizations have to use elements of cultural heritage for self-promotion. Chhabra (2010, pp. 14-16) lists the following facts influencing trends in heritage marketing tourism: (1) demand trends; (2) increasing competition; (3) optimal effective use of time; (4) growing demand for authenticity; (5) ethical consumption and volunteering; (6) continued relationship with politics and the accountability thereof; (7) experience-based economy; (8) resistance to marketing by both consumers and conventional suppliers of heritage; (9) multiculturalism; and (10) heritage economics. All these elements have to be considered when planning and incorporating cultural and historical elements into tourist products and services. Businesses should and have to enrich their entire identity with national, cultural, and historical wealth. 3 Methodology The research model is derived from the Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria document (Global Sustainable Tourism Council, 2013). It contains four variables, i.e. questions or four indicators for evaluating the benefits of cultural heritage and negative impacts on the environment. The mixed research method used in this paper uses a quantitative and qualitative approach. The quantitative questionnaire includes four closed-ended questions that are assessed using a five-point Likert scale from 1 (low level of sustainability) to 5 (high level of sustainability). All variables are categorical (i.e., ordinal). The qualitative questionnaire contains four open- 6 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article ended questions, asking respondents to express their opinion regarding improvement. This was based on the following indicators: Guidelines for visits, Historical and archeological artifacts, Protection of cultural heritage, and Incorporation of cultural heritage. In addition, the questionnaire includes four demographics questions with nominal type of socio-demographics variables (i.e., Person, Gender, and Level of Education). The data were collected from September 7th to September 10th, 2015. According to statistics, Posavje region has on average 250 daily visitors in September and 100 top managers in the tourist sector (Source: Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia). The interviews were carried out personally and randomly in the field with the sample size of 122 individuals, including employees and tourists. Tourists were interviewed between visiting museums, monuments, old town centers, castles, touristic points, touristic information centers, tourist agencies, hotels, and swimming pools. Selected employees from tourist facilities and tourist sites such as castles, museums, churches, public tourist institutions, public tourism associations, hotels, pubs, and tourist farms were CEOs of tourist facilities, top managers, guides, curators, sommeliers, and professional tourist employees. All of the employees were experts with many years of professional experience. The socio-demographic data of the respondents are displayed in Table 1. Two groups of employees in the tourism sector (49.2%) and tourists (50.8%) are balanced also in terms of gender (55.7% females; 44.3% males). The level of education is relatively high, 64.8% of respondents have at least a high school diploma. Comparing both groups, the tourists were better educated, where 69.4% have at least a high school diploma in comparison with employees (i.e., 60.0%). Table 1. Respondents socio-demographic profile Socio-demographic variables n Percentage Person - Employee 60 49.2 - Tourist 62 50.8 Gender - Male 54 44.3 - Female 68 55.7 Level of education - =< High School 43 35.2 - > High School 79 64.8 Notes. n sample (122) Collected quantitative data were analyzed using frequency statistics, Spearman's correlation coefficient, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and Wilcoxon signed-rank test (Field, Miles, & Field, 2012). All four variables are ordinal and not normally distributed. For this reason non-parametric statistics were used. Frequency statistics was used for analyzing demographic data. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used for calculating the correlation between four 7 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article open-ended questions. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used for comparison of four open-ended questions between two groups (i.e., employees and tourists). The reliability of the model was confirmed using Cronbach's Alpha test, which is 0.771, representing a sufficient value. According to the literature the value from 0.7 to 0.8 is acceptable (Field et al., 2012, p. 799). We can conclude based on this analysis that all constructed questions are adequate measures for tourism sustainability (i.e., level of "maximizing benefits to cultural heritage and minimizing negative impacts"). Qualitative data were analyzed according to Silverman and Marvasti (2008, p. 220-221) using three steps: data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing/verification. 4 Results Spearman's correlation coefficient between four variables (i.e., Guidelines for Visits, Historical and archeological artifacts, Protection of cultural heritage, and Incorporation of cultural heritage) was calculated at 0.36 to 0.55 (see Table 2), extending from medium to large, respectively with regard to the correlation value (Field et al., 2012, p. 58). The correlations indicate that questions were adequate measures for tourism sustainability and the research model or data construct was adequate. Table 2. Spearman's correlation coefficient between indicators Indicator (1) (2) (3) (1) Guidelines for Visits (2) Historical and archeological artifacts 0.50** (3) Protection of cultural heritage 0.36** 0.52** (4) Incorporation of cultural heritage 0.47** 0.49** 0.55** Notes. ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed); sample 122 Table 3 shows the means, standard deviations, and medians related to the four questions and the two groups (i.e. employees and tourists) participating in the survey. Both groups agree that the least sustainable is "Protection of cultural heritage" and the most sustainable is "Incorporation of cultural heritage". Tourists scores regarding all four questions were higher in comparison to the employee group. The overall mean of all questions assessed by tourists was 3.70, while for the employees it was 3.15. All Wilcoxon's tests were significant at less than 0.05. As such, the difference in opinion was significant. Results regarding the effect size show the highest difference in the variable "Historical and archeological artifacts", while all effect sizes were between small and medium, more precisely between 0.22 and 0.34. According to the literature, a small effect size is 0.1 and medium effect size is 0.3 (Field et al., 2012, p. 58). Tourism sustainability related to "maximizing benefits to cultural heritage and minimizing negative impacts" that was defined by the four indicators was significantly higher evaluated by the tourist group. In this connection the following question arises: "What is the actual situation?" Are employees too critical, or are tourists too indulgent towards the actual 8 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article situation. Nevertheless, the positive opinion of tourists is encouraging. Overall, the scores were between 2.72 and 4.05. Table 3. Frequencies of indicators Employees (n=60) Tourists (n=62) W P r M SD Mdn M SD Mdn Guidelines for visits 3.37 0.938 3 3.81 0.827 4 3235.0 0.014 -0.22 Historical and archeological artifacts 3.12 1.121 3 3.82 0.820 4 2988.0 <0.001 -0.34 Protection of cultural heritage 2.72 0.846 3 3.11 0.925 3 3202.5 0.008 -0.24 Incorporation of cultural heritage 3.38 1.059 3 4.05 0.818 4 3029.0 <0.001 -0.32 Mean 3.15 3.70 Notes. MMean, SD Standard deviation, Mdn Median, W Wilcoxon's test, p Significance, r Effect size The indicator "Protection of cultural heritage" had a lower value with the results of Wilcoxon signed-rank tests being ambiguous. The difference between "Protection of cultural heritage" and "Guidelines for Visits" (Z = -6.02, p < 0.001), "Protection of cultural heritage" and "Historical and archeological artifacts" (Z = -5.37, p < 0.001), and "Protection of cultural heritage" and "Incorporation of cultural heritage" (Z = -7.08, p < 0.001) were significant. Other combinations were not. Table 4. Suggestions for improvement by indicators Indicator Employees Tourists - sustainable tourism development - sustainable transport strategy - arrival of guests Guidelines for - strategy of visits visits - strategy for protection and preservation of environment and buildings - promotion of archeological and - promotion of sustainable tourism historical artifacts - national identity Historical and archeological artifacts - education and information - integration of sustainable tourism with - collaboration with other businesses - international collaboration - governmental support - virtual museums trademarks - virtual heritage - security policy - security policy Protection of cultural - security systems - security systems heritage - education and information - education and information - competent guides Incorporation of cultural heritage - incorporation in education process - incorporation in business organizations - alliances and partnerships - quality of life - research and development 9 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article Table 4 depicts responses with keywords. The assumption that employees' and tourists' perceptions differ was also supported with the qualitative results. Certain topics were common for both groups and a few are highlighted and compared with one another in Table 4. All respondents expressed suggestions for further sustainable tourism improvement. Employees suggested a more systematic approach while tourists were more practically oriented. Both approaches are important for implementation and further research in this area. 5 Discussion 5.1 Sustainable tourism Sustainable development of the future is part of both European's and Slovenian's orientation, especially as tourists will choose more sustainable destinations. Quality of sustainable tourism destination is recognized by tourists as environment of the current and future generation. Consequently, sustainable destinations will be more attractive in the future. Blancas, Lozano-Oyola, and González (2015, p. 50) propose composite indicators (Sustainable Tourism Country-Brand Ranking) for determining degree of sustainability by country: (1) France, Italy, Norway, Portugal, and Greece, countries with a strong tourist tradition, are at the top of sustainability ranking; (2) new entrances, Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Malta, and Luxemburg are at the bottom; and (3) Slovenia is in the middle. Furthermore, a stable political situation in a country is necessary the success of sustainable development in tourism. Unstable political system and frequent changes of government influences sustainable tourism negatively (Farmaki, Altinay, Botterill, & Hilke, 2015, p. 187). The measuring instrument used in this study was based on the "The Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria", which is a five-point scale measuring low level to high level of sustainability. The mean off all responses were evaluated between 3.15 by employees and 3.70 by tourists. The level of "maximizing benefits to cultural heritage and minimizing negative impacts" was good, but there is sufficient possibility to improve and be excellent (i.e., a 5 on the 5 point Likert scale). 5.2 Guidelines for visits According to the research results of this study, the guidelines (i.e., code of behavior) for visiting culturally or historically sensitive sites were taken critically by employees. Experts with years of experiences expressed strategic approaches. Economic and political situation is crucial for sustainable tourism development in all aspects, taking into account that governmental support is essential for future development direction. The foundation is global and European politics and its compatibility with national policies, depending on all directives that have to be accepted and implemented into the regional and local level. Employees in this research study highlighted sustainable tourism development strategy, which includes: (1) sustainable environment development and sustainable cultural and historical heritage development. (2) strategy of visits, including appointments throughout the year, seasonal price policies with balanced distributed visits, as well as limited visits for especially sensitive 10 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article areas; and (3) strategy for protection and preservation environment, eco-system, buildings, and historical monuments (i.e., physical protection, limiting all types of pollution, as well as waste sorting). A common suggestion provided by both groups (i.e., employees and tourists) was sustainable transport, mainly because transport and logistics are problematic polluters, where improvement is possible and necessary. The tourist group was focused on traditional transport optimization and alternative eco-transport deployment, for example bicycles, carriage, tourist train, and so on. One of the major elements of sustainable tourism development is hospitality and transport, which was also confirmed by the results in this study. Hospitality includes (Ekinci, 2014, p. 182): (1) carrying out training courses on the provision of tourist information and quality hospitality; (2) using international signs on signboards at historic places; and (3) arranging "slow" routes of the city. 5.3 Historical and archeological artifacts For this variable, the opinion of both groups (i.e., employees and tourists) was different, but also with a few common topics. The first common topic was promotion of sustainable tourism and promotion of archeological and historical artifacts. In this connection the groups stressed several possibilities, such as: conferences, expositions, roundtables regarding actual problems, competitions with symbolical rewards, Internet, brochures, and so forth. The second common topic was education and information, meaning that local citizens and tourists were not satisfactory informed. Education about archeological and historical artifacts has to start in the early ages, in kindergarten, and must continue through all generations, especially considering that national identity also is promoted in education and information. Promotion, education, and information depends on national and local policies. "The tourism policy provides a framework within which a competitive tourism destination can be developed on a long-term, sustainable basis" is stressed by Ritchie and Crouch (2004, p. 183). The tourist sector has to be sustainable, economically competitive, effective and efficient. Another common topic also was cooperation with the business sector and collaboration with foreign tourist sectors. All types of connections are important in sustainable tourism development for presenting historical and archeological artifacts. The tourist group in this study also pointed out the importance of integrating historical and archeological artifacts into trademarks, more specifically, to highlight historical and archeological identity into products, services, and identity. Virtual reality technology is in progress for exhibiting archeological, architectural, and natural sites. The goal also is to protect cultural sensitivities. 5.4 Protection of cultural heritage Correct carrying capacity calculation of a sensitive area is critical for the protection of cultural and environmental heritage (Mowforth & Munt, 2009, p. 102). Uncontrolled increasing number of visitors can cause unrepairable damage. In this study, the tourists' opinions regarding protection and preservation of local historical, archeological, culturally, and spiritually important properties and sites was more positive than compared with the employee group opinion. Both groups commented on the same topics with different importance or different actual perception. Suggestions for improvement also were very similar, including 11 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article security policy, which is fundamental for protection and preservation of cultural heritage. Among others, policy also includes: model of environmental planning, internal regulations of employees, cohesion and cooperation with governmental and nongovernmental institutions, compliance with guidelines for regional development, integrated preservation of cultural heritage, and systematic management of cultural sites. All propositions are systematic and regulatory. Both groups mentioned that the implementation of security policy is an efficient security system including technical regulation, security arrangements for access, protection of monuments, and signalization. Both groups agreed that policies and systems are efficient and effective with proper education and information. For protection and preservation of cultural heritage and for appropriate access to cultural heritage suitable guides are vital. Educated and motivated guides are fundamental for sustainable behavior. In comparison to others indicators, protection of cultural heritage was the most poorly rated by both the employee and tourist group. Hence, it is important to place a great deal of effort in this area. 5.5 Incorporation of cultural heritage Authentic key product development and product diversification attract tourists and can be crucial for competitiveness and sustainable development of the destination (Benur & Bramwell, 2015, p. 222; Jakovic, Tubic, & Burovic, 2015, p. 112). The integration of local art, architecture, or cultural heritage elements into tourism and other business operations is important. They represent the part of national identity and are practically free with values that are often priceless. Additionally, they enrich the corporate image. For this category, the tourists group listed: art works, elements of gastronomy, architectural elements, and touristic sites. The employee group stated that the integration of education process at all levels is the most important. In this context, integration also includes all connections and partnerships with different types of business entities. Incorporation of cultural and historical heritage improves quality of tourists and local peoples' life. Moreover, cross-border cooperation between regions and countries can reinforce incorporation of cultural heritage and sustainable tourism development. The results from this study on cultural heritage are in accordance with heritage mission by Garrod and Fyall (2000, p. 686), that it must: (1) be inexpensive and visitor-friendly; (2) be physically and intellectually accessible; (3) balance the needs of the visitors and conservators; (4) be able to maintain authenticity and the integrity of the site; and (5) deliver value for money. 6 Conclusion This paper investigates tourism sustainability of cultural heritage ("maximizing benefits to cultural heritage and minimizing negative impacts"), which was measured by four indicators: guidelines for visits, historical and archeological artifacts, protection of cultural heritage, and incorporation of cultural heritage in the quantitative analysis. The scores were rated between 2.72 and 4.05 on a scale from 1 (low level of sustainability) to 5 (high level of sustainability). The results also showed that maximizing benefits to cultural heritage and minimizing negative impacts was better evaluated by the tourist group with a mean of 3.70 compared to the employee group with a mean of 3.15, resulting in a more positive perception by the tourist 12 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article group. The level of tourism sustainability of cultural heritage was not satisfactory and has to be improved. This study also includes qualitative analysis, which showed that respondents provided a great number of ideas for improving tourism sustainability. Employees were more systematically oriented and proposed governmental support, strategy of visits, strategy of sustainable development, adequate legislation, and so on. While tourists suggested more practical solutions regarding improvement of tourism sustainability, such as sustainable transport, promotion, competent guides, collaboration with business, and so on. The research findings also showed common topics between the employee and tourist groups, including security policy, security systems, education and information, and so on. This study contributes in determining the level of tourism sustainability in the Posavje region. It includes suggestions for tourism sustainability improvement. The results are important for the local community. Improvement is necessary to be competitive on the global tourism market. Although this study provides new insights, it is possible to derive further research directions. This research study focused on maximizing benefits to cultural heritage and minimizing negative impacts, while the other domains from the "Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria" document were not considered. For complete sustainable tourism analysis, researchers have to consider also the remaining three domains: (1) demonstrate effective sustainable management; (2) maximize social and economic benefits to the local community and minimize negative impacts; and (3) maximize benefits to the environment and minimize negative impacts. This study is limited and investigates only the Posavje region. For generalizations, research at the national level is needed. For deeper analysis, it would be advisable to use a larger sample size and capture all players involved in tourism activities, not only top manager employees and tourists. How to implement sustainable tourism successfully is a real and fundamental question that considers the involvement of different stakeholders. References 1. Begum, H., Er, A. C., Alam, A. S. A. F., & Sahazali, N. (2014). Tourist's perceptions towards the role of stakeholders in sustainable tourism. Procedía - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 144, 313— 321. 2. Benur, A. M., & Bramwell, B. (2015). Tourism product development and product diversification in destination. Tourism Management, 50, 213-224. 3. Blancas, F. J., Lozano-Oyola, M., & González, M. (2015). A European sustainable tourism labels proposal using a composite indicator. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 54, 39-54. 4. Chhabra, D. (2010). Sustainable marketing of cultural and heritage tourism. Abingdon, Oxon, UK: Routledge. 5. Commission of the European Communities. (2007). Agenda for a sustainable and competitive European tourism: Communication from the Commission. Author. 6. Ekinci, M. B. (2014). The Cittaslow philosophy in the context of sustainable tourism development: The case of Turkey. Tourism Management, 41, 178-189. 7. Farmaki, A., Altinay, L., Botterill, D., & Hilke, S. (2015). Politics and sustainable tourism: The case of Cyprus. Tourism Management, 47, 178-190. 13 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article 8. Field, A., Miles, J., & Field, Z. (2012). Discovering statistics using R. London: Sage. 9. Garrod, B., & Fyall, A. (2000). Managing heritage tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(3), 682-708. 10. Global Sustainable Tourism Council. (2013). Global sustainable tourism council criteria and suggested performance indicators for hotels and tour operators. Retrieved September 19, 2015, from https://www.gstcouncil.org 11. ICOMOS-Conseil International des Monuments et des Sites. (2004). The World heritage list: Filling the gaps - An action plan for the future (An Analysis by ICOMOS). Paris, France. 12. Jakovic, B., Tubic, D., & Burovic, M. (2015). Sustainable development of rural tourism by developing new and authentic tourism products. Tourism in Southern and Eastern Europe, 3, 103114. 13. Janusz, G. K., & Bajdor, P. (2013). Towards to sustainable tourism framework, activities and dimensions. Procedia - Economics and Finance, 6, 523-529. 14. Mihalic, T. (in press). Sustainable-responsible tourism discourse - Towards 'responsustable' tourism. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2014, 1-10. 15. Mowforth, M., & Munt, I. (2009). Tourism and sustainability: Development, globalisation and new tourism in the third World. Abingdon, Oxon, UK: Routledge. 16. Njoroge, J. M. (2014). An enhanced framework for regional tourism sustainable adaptation to climate change. Tourism Management Perspectives, 12, 23-30. 17. Pereira, E. M., & Mykletun, R. J. (2012). Guides as contributors to sustainable tourism? A case study from the Amazon. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 12(1), 74-94. 18. Pop, I. L., & Borza, A. (2015). Sustainable museums for sustainable development. Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, 6(2), 110-131. 19. Prentice, R. (1993). Tourism and heritage attractions. London: Routledge. 20. Ritchie, J. R. B., & Crouch, G. I. (2004). The competitive destination: A sustainable tourism perspective. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing. 21. Silverman, D., & Marvasti, A. (2008). Doing qualitative research: A comprehensive guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 22. Služba vlade Republike Slovenije za razvoj in evropsko kohezijsko politiko. (2015). Slovenska strategija pametne specializacije-S4 [Slovenian Smart Specialization Strategies-S4]. Retrieved September 21, 2015, from http://www.svrk.gov.si/si/delovna_podrocja/evropska_kohezijska_ politika/ekp_2014_2020/strategij a_pametne_specializacij e/ 23. STO Slovenija. (2015). Turizem v številkah 2014 [Tourism in Numbers 2014]. Ljubljana: STO Slovenija, Slovenska turistična organizacija. Retrieved September 19, 2015, from http: //www .slovenia.info 24. Šmid Hribar, M., & Lapuh L. (2014). Razvojni potenciali kulturne dediščine [Developmental potentials of cultural heritage]. In J. Nared, & N. Razpotnik Viskovic (eds.), Upravljanje območij s kulturno dediščino (pp. 113-120). Ljubljana: Založba ZRC. 25. Timothy, D. J., & Boyd, S. W. (2003). Heritage Tourism. New York: Prentice Hall. 26. Torres-Delgado, A., & López Palomeque, F. (2012). The growth and spread of the concept of sustainable tourism: The contribution of institutional initiatives to tourism policy. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 1 -10. 27. Torres-Delgado, A., & López Palomeque, F. (2014). Measuring sustainable tourism at the municipal level. Annals of Tourism Research, 49, 122-137. 28. Tourism Sustainability Group. (2007). Action for more sustainable European tourism (Report of the Tourism Sustainability Group). Author. 14 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article Februar / February 2016, letnik / volume 1, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 13-26. 29. Waligo, V. M., Clarke, J., & Hawkins, R. (2013). Implementing sustainable tourism: A multi-stakeholder involvement management framework. Tourism Management, 36, 342-353. 30. Weaver, D. (2006). Sustainable tourism: Theory and practice. Burlington, MA: Elsevier. 31. World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Report of the World Commission on environment and development: Our common future. Retrieved September 19, 2015, from http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future.pdf *** Franc Brcar is a university graduate in engineering (B.Sc. in Engineering), received his Master's of Science in Informational and Management sciences (M.Sc.) and his PhD in Quality Management. He has had extensive experience working for a major automobile company. He has worked as a specialist in the field of operational systems and databases as well as worked in the introduction and maintenance of systems for computer construction and ERP solutions. Recently he has been examining management, management of IT systems, management of business processes, and management of innovations and quality. He is an assistant professor at several faculties at the Bachelor, Master's and PhD level. He is a tutor for re search methodology courses, tutor for statistical analysis, conducting workshops on statistical programs (R, SPSS, Lisrel, sem), data coding and data analysis (ATLAS.ti), writing scientific and professional research papers and articles (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Windows, linux). Teaching courses in Production, Engineering, Management, Quality, and Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methodologies. *** Lea-Marija Colarič-Jakše received her Master's of Science in Faculty of Tourism Studies, Turistica Portorož (M.Sc.)-Tourism Management and his Phd in Faculty of Organisation Studies-Quality Management. She has been a consultant for business and tourism and her areas of work were related to organizing, managing and implementing projects, events, writing applications on calls, preparing and implementing strategies and models in place, managing the Tourist Information Centre and a family Tourist farm. She has been lecturer in the field of tourism and Vice-Dean for cooperation with the environment at the Faculty of Tourism, University of Maribor. Now she is an Assistant Professor at Faculty of Organisation Studies in Novo mesto and at Landscape Governance College GRM Novo mesto. Her interests are in the field of the Theory of Tourism, Destination management, Event management, Tourism Strategies, Hotel management, Gastronomy and Oenology. She is also a Head of Institute for Innovative Tourism and International Academy for Innovative Tourism. She is the author and co-author of scientific articles, conference contributions, travel guides, scientific monographs, strategies, manuals, projects, expert reports, research work and studies on tourism and entrepreneurship. Copyright (c) 2017 Franc Brcar, Lea-Marija Colarič-Jakše Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. 15 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 2, str. / pp. 16-26. Članek / Article Essay on legitimacy and democracy Patricia Kaplanova* Faculty of Organisation studies Novo mesto, Ulica talcev 3, 8000 Novo mesto, Slovenia pata.kaplanova@gmail.com Abstract: Purpose and Originality: The aim of the paper is to deeply analyze a concept of legitimacy. Based on the classical works of Lipset and Habermas, the paper discusses conditions, efficiency, and presumptions on which a modern democratic political system stands. Method: The paper analyzes a relationship between positivist and normative understanding of legitimacy questioning a democratic political order. By a content analysis of two main theories of legitimacy, the paper examines a sense of democratic legitimacy in modern societies. Results: A legitimacy is a pillar of any democracy. From the structuralist point of view, in societies there are three main types of crises (economic, social, political), which are present constantly and interconnected by nature and implications. Each crisis creates a specific deficit and challenge for democracy. By overcoming, a stability of democracy is strengthened which makes a (crisis of) legitimacy inevitable. Society: In a time of post-truth politics and crisis of democracy, there is a lack of research dealing with a legitimacy of the democratic regime. By pointing out classical approaches to a stability of democracy, there should be elaborated a new construct of democratic legitimacy reflecting structural conditions of modern societies. This paper is trying to offer an insight into a normative understanding of this construction. Limitations / further research: A theoretical approach could be verified by an empirical research. Keywords: legitimacy, Lipset, Habermas, crisis, democracy. 1 Introduction No other concept in political theory is accompanied with more popularity than a concept of crisis: the crisis of welfare state, the crisis of political parties, the crisis in the Middle East, the Euro-crisis, and the most valuable, the crisis of democracy. Political science recognizes the three main debates about the crisis of democracy. The first one is a public discourse based on an individual aspect of the political elite, political parties, government and democracy as a political system. This debate, proclaimed mainly by media and solved primarily by governments, has its own history. The question of democracy has been accurate since the ancient times especially in the works of Plato and Aristotle (Held, 2006, p. 13). Under the influence of modernity, the questions about democracy had been polarized in the left-right ideological spectrum and fluctuated around the suffrage as a precondition of a classical/minimal model of democracy (Schumpeter, 1942). The discourse about the crisis of democracy had gained a new approach at the end of the twentieth century when took to consideration the institutional changes (Huntington, 1975, Rustow, 1970) through the structural conditions (Lipset, 1960, Moore, 1986) to the cultural aspects of democracy (Huntington, 1996). Democracy as an ideological concept and political system achieved its peak in the late nineties as a liberal democracy (Fukuyama, 1992) dominated in the more * Korespondencni avtor / Correspondence author Prejeto / received: 10. dec. 2016; revidirano / revised: 6. januar 2017; sprejeto / accepted: 29. januar 2017. 16 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article globalized world. The golden era of democracy in these days ended with the beginning of a debate about postmaterialism (Inglehart & Welzel, 2005) and a relatively new phenomenon called a post-democracy (Crouch, 2004). A challenge for a new study of democracy has resonated also in the theories of geopolitics and in the specific supranational order and institutions. The new time of postmodernity are bringing new perspectives and revitalizations of democracy itself by questioning a phenomenon of legitimacy. Today we understand the concept of legitimacy primarily through the exercise of representation, therefore, the political elite which maintain its sovereignty. From this perspective, a delegated representative democracy has its rational justification. Modern representative democracy thus appears through a prism of democratic legitimacy (Belling, 2009, p. 103). However, its understanding of the definition can be illustrated in two models of legitimacy that are present today. The first model is a normative view of legitimacy referring to the people's sovereignty. This theory assumes a single interest of society in social welfare. The most relevant expression of such public interest can be seen through the institutes of referendum or petition. Today, the exercise of power is not limited only by the sovereignty of people, but also by the claim of a common consensus. Ever since social contract (Rousseau), the sovereignty of the people, and thus legitimacy, is understood as a delegation of power to the people to represent which explains a second positivist model of legitimacy. Such delegation can not reach the people, which means the loss of the direct power of the decision. Democratic legitimacy becomes a prism through which the will of citizens is delegated to elected political elites. However, the question what kind of mandate, how, and on what basis the delegation of authority represents the people shall be raised. The issues challenging the legitimacy of representation in modern liberal democracies could be claimed also in terms of fragmentation and heterogenity in society, but mostly the understanding lies in the articulation and implementation of legitimizing the process. Regarding the phenomenon of democracy and legitimacy, I will discuss a relationship between normative and positivist understanding of legitimacy, which, in addition to the current global order, seems complicated. My perception of a value of democracy is a sovereignty of people as a social consensus of public good and public will. At the same time, I understand the sovereignty as the achievement of freedom for the greatest possible number of people through the institute of voting. Therefore, 1 assume that democracy is not a prerequisite for the fulfillment of legitimacy, but from a normative point of view, the legitimacy is a precondition for the efficient functioning of democracy. Thus clarifying concepts and insight into legitimacy will try to verify the stability of the normative definitions of legitimacy in modern democratic systems. 2 Legitimacy A reflection on democracy would be incomplete without an analysis of its legitimacy. The simple definition defines legitimacy "in accord with a rule", but new approaches deal also with an accordance with norms, values, beliefs, practices, and procedures accepted by a group (Zelditch, 2001, p. 33). Legitimacy could be thus understood as an indivisible condition, as 17 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article an integral part of the political system associated with sovereignty and the emergence of the modern state. Legitimacy is, in my opinion, the condition and an essence of the political system associated mainly with the issue of power. This power is sovereign because it enjoys a great support of the public. The concept of legitimacy, as I mentioned, is, therefore, a phenomenon of a modern state. In fact, it legalizes the political authority across all types of regimes, whether authoritarian or democratic. In this concept is the legitimacy even a legally relevant concept: "the legitimate state power can be understood as a power that is anchored in a specific normative system and has thus in itself a legal character." (Coicaud in Belling, 2009,p. 13) The basic definition of legitimacy was defined by Max Weber, who identified three ideal types of the legitimacy of political authority - traditional, legal-rational, and finally, a charismatic (Birch, 2007,p. 96). Weber concept can be included into the traditional theory of legitimacy, which is based on the contextual development of human societies because it shifts our understanding of political authority in its historical development. The traditional authority we observe in theocratic states, where authority is delegated, not from the bottom (from the people), but from »above« power, such as from God or inherited. Legal-rational legitimacy is a legitimacy of modern states because it relies on the transfer of power from the people to political representation. So we are talking about a democratic legitimacy (Belling, 2009,p. 103), where a loyalty of the people is delegated to non-personal institutions, and so is the power defined in the constitutional rules. The third type, which from my point of view, resonates nowadays is a charismatic type of authority, where irrationality and emotions of people delegate the power to the "charismatic leader". Consequently, Weber's typology is useful for defining a representation as one aspect of democracy. However, the definition and application of the concept of legitimacy in theories of democracy bring many complications. The so-called crisis of legitimacy in the context of the existing political authority was described by Giovanni Sartori: "..political regimes are maintained by their legitimacy and are undermined, if not completely broke, by a "crisis of legitimacy"...the crisis of legitimacy is commonly referred to and identified as a crisis of "authority" (Sartori, 1993,p. 189). Why, however, there is a crisis of legitimacy, why the political authority did already "not enjoy" a mass support of the population and a democracy from the bottom, in its primary values, weakens? Crisis of legitimacy by Lipset What is the legitimacy according to the Seymore Martin Lipset? In his work (Political Man, 1960) on a stability of democracy (as a political system), Lipset identifies two main conditions. The first is an instrumental angle of the effectiveness of the political system. The goal of effectiveness might be perceived as an economic development and growth. According to Lipset, the efficiency means a current setup of the political system under which the 18 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article government satisfies demands of society for better socio-economic development (Lipset, 1960,p. 64). However, the instrumental nature of the conditions for the stability of the system is insufficient. On the other hand, Lipset identifies legitimacy as an evaluative condition for democratization. Legitimacy, in his terms, means an ability of the political system to ensure that the existing political institutions are the most appropriate for the society (Lipset, 1960,p. 64). The question remains, what is the most appropriate for the society? Is really the best for a society what citizens elect during the elections? Could it be identified a Maddison tyranny of masses which can legitimize even an authoritarian regime? The crisis of legitimacy is from his point of view a historical phenomenon associated with the mass communication, societal revolution and human development. As he notes, "the crisis of legitimacy is a crisis of change" (Lipset, 1960,p. 65). A Change in modern society is therefore understood as a period when the society changes its status quo and mobility, but also a structure. Consequently, a structural change of society put traditional political institutions at the risk by increasing societal demands. At that time, some social movements do not have an impact on the political system. Lipset identifies two types of loss of legitimacy in the context of the process of social change. The first one comes from the papers of A. Tocqueville who identifies in the past countries which have been transforming themselves from aristocratic monarchies to democratic republics, like Great Britain, Sweden, (Lipset, 1960, p. 65). From the historical point of view, we can identify the states, which have "rooted" institutions of aristocratic heritage functioning till today and never transformed. On the other hand, we have the example of Italy, where the constitutional monarchy became a fascist dictatorship illegitimately excluding majority groups from political system (especially Catholics). The second type of crisis of legitimacy is when new social groups gain access to the political process. In the nineteenth century, in particular, it was the social class of workers, in the twentieth century, the colonial elites. When new groups of the society become politically active and get easily to the political institutions, they could have a loyalty to old political institutions. This way even the monarchy can maintain their status quo and enable new social classes to participate in democratic processes so may avoid revolutions and civil unrest. In this case, however, this is about the institutional preservation of the political system and not a change of elites. In general, we can say that the political system is effective, if it is not maintaining the traditional conservative groups, and if the access policy is rejected to majority social groups in crisis periods (Lipset, 1960,p. 67). In both cases, however, there is a lack of democratic legitimacy. Thus, we can assume that for the stability of democracy this form of efficiency is enough? Here emerges a possibility for a revolutionary/alternative movement bent on power and participation in politics. In my opinion, this means also the legitimacy coming from a participation of majority social groups preserving the pluralism of interests. The relationship between the effectiveness and legitimacy of the system thus determines a stability of democracy. I assume, however, that not only its stability but especially a quality of regime management. States that belong to the category both conditions and therefore are also efficient and legitimate are stable democracies, the examples are according to Lipset the United states of America or Sweden. At the same time states, which are effective but 19 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article illegitimate, are according to him more fragile. An example of such establishment was Austria and Germany in the twenties of the twentieth century. Ineffective and at the same time fragile countries, such as Hungary from the past communist regime, there are unstable models. However, countries that are less economically developed, but they have legitimacy (i.e. their profile), have more stable political systems than countries that are economically developed but do not have the legitimacy. Regardless, we can draw the conclusion that, on the basis of the Lipset theories, we cannot clearly verify the thesis is that economic development, hence the efficiency of the legislative procedure, ensure by itself the stability of the democratic system or is the only precondition for the democratization process. Nevertheless, the relationship between the democratization of the system and the economic development is in Lipset terms, a linear relationship. The additional criterion of democracy is according to the theorists, such was Robert Dahl, D. B. Truman, A. F. Bentley, a pluralism of interest groups identified on the basis of a societal conflict. The conflict is a constructive element and an integral part of the political process (Richova, 2000,p. 148) for strengthening and balancing a political power in pluralistic society. The phenomenon of an existence of the soft cleavage in the society was also by Lipset defined as a legitimate democracy (Lipset, 1960,p. 71). These conflicts he thinks the historical factors shaping the social cleavages on the basis of the crucial issues in the society. The three main cleavages from a historical point of view were based on characters of religion, social class, and economic determinism. The first was to identify a position of the church in the state, the second cleavage was a penetration of a lower social class of workers into a political and economic system (admitting a political and social citizenship) through universal suffrage, and finally, the third cleavage was an ongoing struggle for a redistribution of national income and wealth. These cleavages have been interconnected in societies. The evidence is that the fight of the conservative Catholics against the socialist movements is actually a struggle not only economic but also a fundamental struggle of God and Satan (Lipset, 1960,p. 75). Where the number of the historical cleavages overlap and create the basis for ideological politics, democracy will be volatile and unstable. Although, in words of Robert Dahl, even cultural pluralism influences the stability of the regime. In my view, a definite pluralism of opinions in society does not guarantee its quality, nor stability. However, the present cleavages in society create political parties, movements and an environment for »doing« a politics. A cleavage basis of society enriches culture where dominates a negotiation and a healthy political competition. This culture can be maintained by a political tolerance, which provides the parties and protects political minorities to protect the society from serious conflicts (Lipset, 1960,p. 79). What, however, makes the political tolerance work? In my view, this is paradoxically the economic development, and thus the efficiency of the system (accompanied by industrialization, urbanism, modernization, education). This approach could be explained by a Fukuyama's theory of liberal democracy in his work the Great disruption (2005). Fukuyama assumes that in liberal democracies the main conflicts and cleavages based on socio-economic conditions would be overcome and new cultural values would dominate in modersn societies. Fukuyama identifies the stability of modern liberal democracy based on 20 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article the cultural norms and values such as individualism, pluralism, and tolerance embedded in the traditional institutions (Fukuyama, 2005,p. 24). Tolerance as a precondition and a moral value in terms of F. Fukuyama has become the social capital of society, on which basis is civic culture created. In the end, the relationship between democracy and civil society is so narrow that the two not only makes but are also freely interchangeable (Fukuyama, 2005,p. 30). The crisis of legitimacy is from the perspective of Lipset crisis, a change in its different variations, and thus an indicator for the analysis of the quality of democracy from the normative point of view. It is thus currently on demand to ask if the crisis of legitimacy implies an absence of values and standards of democracy? It is also according to the Lipset the cause of political intolerance, the deficit of structural conditions of the instability of democracy? Crisis of legitimacy by Habermas The structural conditionality of democracy was elaborated in detail by German philosopher and theoretician Jurgen Habermas in his book the Crisis of legitimacy (1975) and later developed in his work the Structural transformation of society (2000). Habermas preview of this issue stems from the thesis that the legitimacy of political authority and therefore democracy has a socio-economic conditionality. Structural conditions, such as economic growth or the so-called welfare system, will be for certain groups of people in society over time unacceptable, because the system, or the economic objectives of the modern state will not be compatible with the moral principles of the society. Consequently, Birch (2007) sees the contradiction of the economic goals and moral principles such as the relationship between the human individual and the nature of the world (Birch, 2007,p. 104). So to say that the modern conception of the legitimacy is built by a confrontation between liberal democracy and individual freedom against the moral principle of a public good. Habermas, however, does not make the concept of the legitimacy of the easy incline for democracy. Not only that he classifies the types of legitimacy in society, but at the same time, he clarifies their relevance on the background of several "crises of legitimacy". The precondition for the categorization is the paradigm of the "crisis of democracy", but not in a crisis mode, but as a crisis of the democratic state of late capitalism (Merkel, 2013,p. 13). Habermas recognizes several types of "crises of democracy" on the basis of the belief that all of these types are an accompanying phenomenon of modern liberal states in the second half of the twentieth century. The categorization is based on the idea that there are three types of societal systems -economic system, political system and socio-cultural - within are four types of crisis tendencies (see Table no. 1). Interdependences of these three components of a democratic state refer to basic three dimensions of a private, public and civil sector of life in society. The transformation of legitimacy and the crisis he sees in the new view on the system legitimization of state. At the end of the twentieth century according to Habermas the state's economic system "does not ensure the conditions of manufacture as in liberal capitalism, but on the contrary, actively enters into it." (Habermas, 2000,p. 57). In the political system, Habermas observes, in particular, the administrative system through bureaucracy. On the 21 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article basis of the Marxist tradition, he points out a thesis that the state replaces the market mechanism there, where the state "creates and improves the conditions of a surplus of accumulated capital." (Habermas, 2000,p. 50) From the socio-structural point of view, Habermas identifies that there is a structurally depoliticized society which legitimization is reduced to two requirements. The first is a civil privatization perceived from a viewpoint of political restraint (political dealignment). Civil society in its preview that "resides" in a conjunction with career, leisure time and consumption and at the same time, it is expected adequate compensation from the education system (Habermas, 2000,p. 52). The second requirement is a condition where the custom depoliticization of society requires justification, which is provided by either the democratic theories of the elites or technocratic system theories (Habermas, 2000,p. 53). From his point of view, we return to a democracy from a liberal perspective, a minimalistic democracy of Schumpeter or Weber, or institutionalization, where an institutional functioning is a precondition for a stability of democracy. The question here remains, as based on the theory of Lipset, whether state's economic system and its crisis is a precondition for democracy. From the perspective of Lipset, which tried to take into account these conditions, it is obvious that the economic system and its crisis will cause some changes in the political and socio-cultural system. Therefore, Habermas theory of crisis of legitimacy builds on the argument of Karl Marx that the economic crisis leads to a social crisis and then to a crisis of politics (Habermas, 2000,s. 56). Table 1. The categorization of crises of legitimacy (Habermas, 2000, p. 56) System Crisis Identity Crisis Economic system Economic Crisis Political system Rationality Crisis Legitimation Crisis Socio-cultural system Motivation Crisis If we look better on different forms of crises - economic crisis, the crisis of rationality, a crisis of legitimacy and a crisis of motivation - we can say that these forms and their characteristics lead to threats to democracy also from its normative point of view. Moreover, Marx's school argues that economic crises in capitalism are periodical and necessary (Merkel, 2013,p. 13). Therefore, the government ought to respond to these challenging problems of liberal capitalism in a specific way. Why there is a need for a state to enter into the private sector? According to Habermas, a class has a non-political character in modern societies. Indirectly speaking. Habermas is referring to corporations, a non-political estate, which privatizes the social added capital. However this "non-political estate" must be subordinated to the state's functions and norms (Habermas, 2000,p. 68). In this regard, societies demand larger requirements on the welfare state, the state of liberal democracy. The economic crisis thus becomes a political crisis, which, according to Habermas, has to be solved by a political-administrative system. This political-administrative system, called by James O Connor (1974) as "fiscal scissors", is under a pressure of increasing expenses for employment or social 22 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article security just in the time of crisis. However, if the government does not respond quickly to this dilemma, it causes additional, a crisis of rationality in the administrative system (Merkel, 2013,p. 13). An unmanageable situation, so-called government overload, leads to a crisis of legitimacy of the regime itself. A symptom of the crisis of rationality is an inflation and a crisis of public finances because of increasing demands of the socio-cultural system. Regarding the social security, education, pensions, leisure, infrastructure, environment and social consumption, there is a cleavage between collective will (public interest) and public administrative system of the state. The crisis of rationality, so naturally enters into a phase of the crisis of legitimacy in such a way, where the administrative system can perform intended functions, which are important for its maintenance (Habermas, 2000,p. 89). Habermas, on the other hand, does not see the crisis of rationality as a symptom of a loss of rationality of the economic system, but on the contrary, he sees it as a decline of the system of motivations. The problem of socio-economic motivation is the assumption of a crisis of legitimacy as the emergence of doubts about the standards of democracy (Habermas, 2000,p. 90). The crisis arises, if the claims on the conformal compensation will grow faster than a number of available values (Habermas, 2000,p. 95), which means that there are created greater expectations of society, which cannot be satisfied by the state. Finally, this crisis of legitimacy, which prevails by societal demands, deeper the crisis of motivation. The crisis of motivation arises when the socio-cultural system changes so that its outcomes become for the state and for the social system dysfunctional (Habermas, 2000,p. 97). But what does this dysfunction mean? This is an politicization of the society, the exact opposite of the traditional idea of participation. Almond and Verba (1963) on the basis of the political culture pointed out a thesis on the stability of democracy based on civic culture and citizenship. With this respect, the traditional notion of civic culture includes active political participation. The question remains, how this active political participation revitalize in more skeptical and depoliticized society? Habermas says that the structural change the society is going on under a mechanism of the civil privatization, which means that the motivation of a citizen is connected to public sector through interest on consumption of education, concern for family, health, leisure, and the total negativism towards politics (Habermas, 2000,p. 97). Today, from the perspective of Almond and Verba, Habermas claims a contradictory thesis. Nowadays, the citizens are on one hand, passive, unengaged and respectful to elites (Almond and Verba, in Habermas, 2000,p. 99) and, on the other hand, in the framework of the democratic ideals of civic culture, he/she should be active, engaged and have an impact. Legitimacy is, therefore, from the point of view Habermas, a multidimensional referring to different forms of the legitimacy of political, economic and socio-cultural system interactions. From my point of view, the dimensions are not only coherent, but the relationships between them are mainly causal in nature, which must be reflected in the conceptualization of legitimacy itself. A critical contribution to the Habermas theory of legitimacy points out a legacy of neo-Marxist perspective. Nevertheless, political science has identified several changes of politics and socio-structural changes. Merkel thus identified on the basis of the Habermas work several challenges of democracy: the periodic crisis of capitalism (the 23 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article economic crisis), the inadequacy of solutions to the economic crisis by the political system (crisis of rationality), the loss of legitimacy of the weak interconnection of outputs (crisis of legitimacy) and the loss of citizens's confidence in democratic institutions, which leads to the problem of input (the crisis of motivation) (Merkel, 2013, p. 5). 3 Conclusion The main point of this article was to prove that democracy is a normative concept, which has changed its values on the basis of changing politics and structural conditions of societies. On behalf of the determination of independent variable, the crisis of legitimacy, I demonstrated the thesis that democracy is also a variable category. Regardless, I analyzed the legitimation crisis from two aspects - as a condition of stability of the democratic political system (Lipset, 1960) and as a structural understanding of legitimacy (Habermas, 1973). The legitimacy, which brings a stability and an effectiveness into the political system, has then a substantial purpose for democracy and processes of democratization in general. From the Weberian perspective, which is broadly proclaimed as a classical theory of legitimacy and authority, I describe the structural conditions for the legitimacy of a regime by Martin Lipset. In his work Political Man (1960) Lipset pointed out the core socio-structural preconditions for a democracy and in my point of view, his contribution is still valid and comprehensive for political analysis. Additionally, Jurgen Habermas offered a broader analysis of structural conditions of the political system in his book Legitimation Crisis (1973). Habermas expanded the concept of legitimacy by proclaiming that the political institutions do not have the administrative capabilities to overcome a legitimation crisis which has the structural character. One of my conclusions, regarding the crisis of legitimacy, is that a structural character makes the political institutions redundant because of the modernization processes in a space and a time. I assume that the changing structural conditions of society could always create new challenges for a political reformation and revision of democratic order. References 1. Belling, V. (2009). Legitmita moci v postmodern dobe, Proč potrebuje Evropskâ unie clenské stâty? Brno: Mezinârodni politologicky ustav ISBN 978-80-210-5081-5 2. Birch, A. (2007). The concepts and theories of modern democracy 3rd edition. New York: Routlegde. ISBN10: 0-203-96365-2 3. Crouch,C. (2004). Post-Democracy. Polity Press, Cambridge/UK. ISBN 0-7456-3315-3 4. Crouch, C. (2013). Post-Democracy: The Challenge for Europe. Queriers. Retrieved: http://www.queries-feps.eu/post-democracy-the-challenge-for-europe/ 5. Dahl, R. (1995). Demokracie a jeji kritici. Praha: Victoria Publishing. ISBN 80-85605-80-1 6. Dahl, R. (1999). Can International Organizations be Democratic? A Sceptic's View. In Democracy's Edges, edited by I. Shapiro and C. Hacker-Cordon (1999), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN-10 0-521-64389-9 7. Dahl, R. (2001). O demokracii. Praha: Portâl. ISBN 80-7178-422-2 24 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article 8. Fukuyama,F. (2005). Vel'ky rozvrat. Ludskaprirodzenost' a opatovne nastolenie spolocenskeho poriadku. Bratislava: AGORA, s. r. o.. ISBN 8096939416 9. Habermas, J. (1975). Legitimation Crisis. Boston: Beacon Press. ISBN 0-7456-0609-1 10. Habermas, J. (1996). The Inclusion of the Others. The MIT Press. ISBN-10: 0262581868 11. Habermas,J. (2000). Problemy legitimity v pozdnim kapitalismu. Praha: Filosoficky ustav AV CR. 12. Habermas, J. (2000b). Strukturalnipremena verejnosti. Praha: Karolinum, Praha ISBN 80-7007134-6 13. Held, D. (2006). Models of Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press ISBN 13: 978-07456-3147-9 14. Held,D.,& Archibugi,D. (2011). Cosmopolitan Democracy: Paths and Agents. Ethics and International Affairs, 25(4), Available at: http://www.irpps.cnr.it/en/system/files/Archibugi_Held_CD_Paths_and_Ways.pdf 15. Huntington, S. (2008). Treti vlna. Demokracie na sklonku dvacateho stoleti. Brno: Centrum pro studium demokracie a kultury ISBN 978-80-7325-156-7 16. Inglehart, R.,& Welzel, CH. (2005). Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy The Human Development Sequence, Cambridge University Press. ISBN-10 0-511-33731-0 17. Lipset, S. (1960). Political Man: The Social Basis of Politics. New York, Garden City: Doubleday. 18. Merkel, W. (2004). Embedded and Defective Democracies. In Aurel Croissant and Wolfgang Merkel (eds.) (2004). Special Issue of Democratization: Consolidated or Defective Democracy? Problems of Regime Change, 11(5), pp. 33-58. 19. Merkel, W. (2013). Is there a Crisis of Democracy? Can we answer the question? Humboldt University of Berlin, First Draft of Paper for Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Associassion, Dostupne na:http://www.democracybarometer.org/Papers/Merkel_2013_APSA.pdf 20. Moravcsik, A. (2004). Is There a "Democratic Deficit" in World Politics? A Framework for Analysis. Government and Opposition39 (2): 336-363, published: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2004.00126.x/abstract 21. Richova, B (2006). Prehled modernich politologickych teorii. Praha: Portal ISBN 80-7367-177-8 22. Sartori, G. (1993). Teoria demokracie. Bratislava: Archa ISBN 80-7115-049-5 23. Schumpeter, J. (2004). Kapitalismus, socialismus a demokracie. Brno: Centrum pro studium demokracie a kultury ISBN 80-7325-044-6 24. Zelditch, M. (2001). Theories of legitimacy. In Jost, J.,& Major, B.(eds.) (2001). The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations. Cambridge Uni. Press, pp. 33-53. 25 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article *** Patricia Kaplanova is a Ph.D. Candidate at Faculty of Organisation studies in Novo mesto, Slovenia. She is conducting a doctoral thesis about Slovenian social identities and their impact on the political participation in the European Union. Her research interests include theories of democracy, European studies, political sociology and other related fields. Â Â Â Copyright (c) 2017 Patricia Kaplanova Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. 26 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article Februar / February 2016, letnik / volume 1, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 13-26. Description of the most important wars, which took place on Balkan territory Michal Franek* University of Trnava, Hornopotočna 23,918 43 Trnava Misinko0001@gmail.com Abstract: Purpose and Originality: The article is overview of Balkan changing wars. Balkan is historical area of conflict, however there are wars, which should be singled out due to their influence on the territory as well as on the population and political situation in the region. Method: In the article historical descriptive method is used. We were trying to describe pretexts, causes, courses, endings and consequences of the largest armed conflicts. Result: We can say that main historical wars in Balkans were Battle of Frigidus River, Battle of Kosovo, First and Second Balkan war, Civil war in Yugoslavia and Kosovo war. Society: The results should raise the awareness of the nature of the territory as well as increase the understanding of the mixing different influences in the territory of Balkans. Limitation: Article is leaving out two world wars, due to their different scale and impact on the history, which goes beyond the borders of Balkan. Keywords : Balkan, war, Ottoman Empire, Yugoslavia, Romania, Serbia, Kosovo. 1 Introduction There are many specific territories in the world, which pays the biggest attention of the strongest world leaders, which are discussed in world media. But there are some that in today's world may not have the main word during evening's news. One of such, historically very interesting territories is the Balkans. There are many different definitions of the Balkan region. One group of experts has the opinion that Balkan is an area between Sava river and lower Danube river. Others say that Balkan is the area of Yugoslavia territory, which does not exist anymore (since 1991) plus Greece. In any case, most of the territory is populated by different Slavic groups. It is believed that Slavs are very friendly, peaceful, non-conflict nation. However, if they feel endangered, they are able to fight for their truth as hard as no other nations. According to that, history of Slavs is full of conflicts, in which they had to face more powerful entities. Since the first mention about this territory, the area has been affected by huge amount of destructive wars. In this article, we will try to focus on wars, that influenced history of the territory. War and armed conflict is the oldest and most common way of solving problems. Leaders of involved states giving orders to their people to kill the opposite people is the ordinary phenomenon of today's world. Because of this, it seems appropriate to address this topic. 2 Method As the sources, from which we will draw the conclusions are predominantly books, supported by the articles as well as information provided by the courtesy of Slovak historian Mgr. Dušan * Korespondenčni avtor / Correspondence author Prejeto / received: 20. nov. 2016; revidirano / revised: 18. dec. 2016; sprejeto / accepted: 8. januar 2016. 27 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article Halaj, CsC., who was of great support during the preparation of this text. Based on these sources we will try to provide reliable view of the most important armed conflicts in the region. We will concentrate on Battle of the Frigidus river, Battle of Kosovo, fight for the independence of Balkan nations, civil war in Yugoslavia and Kosovo war. In the first part of the article we will present the definitions of Balkan territory. As mentioned earlier, there are many different definition, thus we will try to define the region for the purposes of this article on our own. And provide short historical overview of the events in the region. In next part we will concentrate on individual conflicts and try to provide comprehensive information. 3 Definition and brief history of the Balkans As mentioned before, the most common definition is clear - area between Adriatic sea and Sava river, lower Danube river towards Black sea. Second definition is more political one and includes territory of former Yugoslavia and Greece. Third group of scientists made a deal and declared Balkan as an area between Sava and Danube plus the rest of the Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia and Romania. Many people consider Balkan as an area between Adriatic sea and The Black sea. Based on this, it is possible to agree that taking broadest territorial definition can be beneficial. In this manner one can say that Balkan is composed of Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, Macedonia, Greece, Romania, and European part of Turkey. This is also the territory to which we will further refer to as Balkans. Despite early inhabitation, first stable settlements are dated to about 1200 B.C., when the most advanced Balkan culture, Ilyrian culture fell apart. (Pinteric, 2017) During the 8th century B.C., Balkan was influenced by Greeks with their ancient greek culture. (Pinteric, 2017) In 3rd century, biggest part of Balkan was connected to Macedonian empire after great successes of Alexander the Great. (Pinteric, 2017) Thanks to a spectacular growth of the Roman Empire, after a fall of Macedonia, territory of Balkan became a part of Roman Empire during the 2nd century B.C. During this period, Balkan was divided into several provinces, such as Thrace and Dalmatia, which are well-known until now. (Pinteric, 2017) After the fall of Roman empire and splitting it into Western Roman Empire and Eastern Roman Empire, Balkan became a part of an east part - Byzantine Empire. (Pinteric, 2017) During the 6th and 7th century, we can notice strong wave of migration of Slavic people in this territory. (Pinteric, 2015) After that, Bulgarians mixed with Slavic created first separated Slavic state -the Bulgarian Empire. This empire was later swallowed by Byzantine, but in 12th century, Bulgarians broke free as well as Serbians and Croatians with them (Croatians became later a part of the Hungarian Empire). (Pinteric, 2017) After the fall of Constantinople in 1453, new threat appeared by Turks. Ottoman warriors broke the resistance and defeated defenders. Turkish supremacy lasted for four centuries. (Pinteric, 2017) In 1821, we can see a first attempt to cancel Turkish occupation - Greek war of independence. After Greeks got the independence, Serbians, Bulgarians, Albanians and Montenegrins benefited from the weakening of the Ottoman Empire and got independent too. (Pinteric, 2017) In the end of 19th century, Ottoman empire was so weak they were not able to solve the territorial disputes, so the conflicts between Balkan states started. Serbians and Bulgarians were arguing about 28 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article today's Macedonian land, Greeks and Albanians about North Epirus (today's south Albania) and Albanians competed with Serbians for Kosovo. After two Balkan wars, and a World War I., the Austria-Hungary empire fell down and new states were created here - Romania and Kingdom of Serbians, Croatians and Slovenians (in 1929 this kingdom changed its name to Yugoslavia). (Pinteric, 2017) Bosnia and Herzegovina was also a part of this kingdom. After the world war II., during the „cold" war, Balkan states were influenced by Soviet Union, but later after Tito-Stalin split, they became independent. (Pinteric, 2017) During this period, territorial disputes persisted between every state there. When the comunism fell down in 1989, national issues between Yugoslavian nations had started. After long and exhausting conflicts and debates, Europe has come to form we know today. 4 Battle of the Frigidus River One of the first war conflicts which will be analyzed is battle of the Frigidus river. Battle was fought in between 5th and 6th September 394 between Eastern and Western roman empires. This war is also called a war between Christians and pagan religions1. (Sigurdsson, 2015) Main problem appeared when Constantine became sole Roman emperor in 324. He proclaimed that Christianity is legal and processes, which should penalize the Christian people should be stopped. (Sigurdsson, 2015) Even though the Christian adherents became free, there was still predominance of paganism in Roman empire. Members of Roman senate were against this order. In 380, East Roman emperor Theodosius I. released an edict, that declared Christianity as major religion in both parts - in eastern and in western too. (Sigurdsson, 2015) After this rule, western politicians were trying to restore the belief of the ancient gods. Those people, who disagreed with having Christianity as a major religion, were trying to act against Theodosius. He was former emperor of Eastern Roman empire, but he has right to appoint western officials. (Sigurdsson, 2015) His biggest opponent was a Frank, Arbogast, whose position was supreme military commander of the Western Empire. (Sigurdsson, 2015) Arbogast was not the officer of the territory, he was just a commander to Eugenius - former emperor in the west. (Sigurdsson, 2015) After years of struggling, the civil war started. Eastern army was not ready, they had to recover from battles against Goths from 378. Because of this, Theodosius's military generals had to proclaim recruitment and conscription. After enormous preparations, eastern army was ready to leave Constantinople in may, 394.(Sigurdsson, 2015) Eugenius decided to centralize his army, so all strategic places, which should have been used as defensive tool against a danger from east were deserted. So the eastern army continues further and further. They finally meet their opponent near the valley of the Frigidus River (today the Vipava River). (Sigurdsson, 2015) Eastern army consisted of Visigoths, Greeks, Syrians and Georgians, while western army consisted of barbarians and Gallo-Romans. It was approximately 50 000 men against 50 000 men. (Sigurdsson, 2015) Arbogast's army was in an advantage after first day, their strategy was more useful. However, the next day, very strong windstorm started, from the east to the west. (Sigurdsson, 2015) Western warriors were no table to fight in these conditions. Wind was so strong that arrows, 1 Followers of religions other than their own, or the related Abrahamic religions. 29 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article which have been shot, were not being able to reach the goal (Sigurdsson, 2015) Luckily, Theodosius was celebrating a victory. Eugenius was executed and Arbogast committed a suicide. Unfortunately, a few months after this victory, Theodosius died.(Sigurdsson, 2015) He divided the empire between his two sons. This battle was the final decline of Greco-Roman polytheism in favour of Christianity over the following century.(Sigurdsson, 2015) 5 Battle of Kosovo Many historians consider this battle as the most important battle for Serbian nation in their history. (Morvay, 2004) On one side, there was a nation, which after years and years of prosperity had to face big internal problems. One the other hand was Ottoman Empire, hungry, strong empire, which destroyed everything what comes it's way. The battle had taken place in 1389, specifically on 15th of June. (Morvay, 2004) Situation before the outbreak of the conflict was complicated. During the reign of Stefan Dušan, Serbian kingdom was going through „golden ages." (Morvay, 2004) Kingdom was controlling almost the whole territory of Balkan. Unfortunately, in1355, Serbian emperor often called as „the mighty," died. (Morvay, 2004) This was the moment that started a crisis. The kingdom did not stay united, there were many small principalities vying for power (see Picture 1). Busy with non-essential issues, they were ignoring the threat coming from the south. On the lead of Ottoman Empire was very capable emperor Murad I., declared as one of the strongest sultans of all. (Morvay, 2004) He used very rational tactics to subjugate Serbian territories. He was defeating Serbian rulers one by one. (Morvay, 2004) In 1363, after the battle of Marica river, Serbian rulers in Macedonia had to admit Turkish supremacy. (Morvay, 2004) In 1386, during the battle of Niš, most powerful ruler, Lazar Hrebeljanovič was defeated. (Morvay, 2004) Even though he fell, he continued in resistance. After this fight, both sides were preparing themselves for the final fight. Lazar realised that if he wants to be successful, he needs to reunite all the territories left, no matter what nation are they. (Morvay, 2004) The fight took its place during the Vidov dan.2 On Lazar side, there were warriors from all over the Balkan - Serbians, Bosnians, Bulgarians, Croatians, Albanians with a little help of units from Hungary. (Morvay, 2004) However, Turkish army was bigger, well-organized and with bigger discipline. Turkish army destroyed its opponent, as the Ottomans used to. They killed almost all people fighting in this battle with no mercy. Warriors of Christian alliance were defeated (see Picture 2). One thing, which can be taken as a „consolation prize", is that sultan Murad I. died. When everything was lost, one of Serbian commanders, Miloš Obilič, gave up, and he came to sultan with suggestion. He told him that he wants to betray Lazar, but when he came to Murad near enough, he stabbed him with a dagger. (Morvay, 2004) Sad news for Turkish people, but their triumph has not been questioned by anyone. Murad's son, Bajazir finished it and definitely defeated Lazar. (Morvay, 2004) After this, Lazar and all his 2 15th of July, important holiday for orthodox people, especially Serbs. 30 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article collaborationists were beheaded. After his death, Lazar Hrebeljanovic became one of the most important people in Serbian Orthodox religion. (Morvay, 2004) Lazar's son, Stefan Lazarovic had to agree Turkish supremacy. (Morvay, 2004) He promised to act like a vassal of Turkey, to pay taxes and to participate in all other expeditions. (Morvay, 2004) Few years later, Serbian army was forced to fight side by side with Ottomans against Zigmund of Luxemburg, Hungarian emperor in the battle of Nikopol. (Morvay, 2004) After this fight, Serbia became a part of Ottoman Empire for 489 years. For normal people, this battle is just one of many battles, which Turkish leads against their opponents in belief, that they can rule the Europe. For Serbians, this conflict is part of the tradition, there are many of myths and folk songs, which worship Serbians fighting in this war as heroes (Browne, 2000). St. Vitus' day is the day, when Serbians celebrate the greatness of Serbian empire, although they lost in this battle. 6 Fight for the indepentepce of Balkan nations As mentioned before, in 15th century almost whole Balkan territory was under Turkish rule. Naturally, greatness of the empire like the Ottoman one could not last forever. At the end of the 19. century, empire was becoming weaker and weaker. The idea of independence has became more and more popular. Idea of independence was supported by global powers, but there was no interest of helping Balkan people to live better, there were only private goals (Kallo, 2014) Czarist Russia wanted to access the Back sea Straits and Austria-Hungary was against Turkish cruel methods, so in the interest of public opinion, they wanted to defeat the Ottomans. (Kallo, 2014) Even though new independent states were emerging at the end of 19. century, there was still huge area in Balkan, which was under Turkish rule. Romania, Bulgaria, Greece and Serbia became first independent states in Balkan. (Pinteric, 2017), each of them with a different story of getting the independence. First independent state of Romania - Romanian principality was created in 1859, as a combination of Moldova and Wallachia. (Blyukher, 2005) These two regions broke free from Turks and Russians, which had to leave these territories after the Treaty of Paris. (Blyukher, 2005) Bulgarians got their freedom in 1878, after a stream of events, which happened here. (Nikolov, 2007) Ottomans, who occupied Bulgaria had to leave, because they were defeated by Russian units. (Nikolov, 2007) In Family encyclopaedia of world history (2000) authors proclaimed, that after this conflict, Turks had to admit autonomy of Bulgarian principality and after a Treaty of San Stefano, Bulgarians became independent. Greeks became free after series of independence uprisings. According to authors of Family encyclopaedia of World history (2000) after First Pan-Hellenic Congress from 1821, it was clear, that Greece will become new, free, state. But this was not accepted by global powers. France, Russia and Great Britain accepted the independence in 1830 after the London Protocol. Regarding to Serbia, their process of getting the freedom is connected with uprisings. (Tejchman, 2005) In 1806, Serbians made a deal with Istanbul that Serbia will be autonomous state, but because of Russo-Turkish war, this idea was not applied in practice. (Tejchman, 2005) After this war, Ottomans could focus their anger to Serbians. We can see another try from Turkish side to rule Serbian territory. In 1815, another uprising was 31 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article conducted and Serbians announced autonomy again, but still not officially. (Teichman, 2005) Third try was finally successful in 1829. (Teichman, 2005) True independence was finally recognized in 1867, when last Turkish soldiers left Serbia and in 1878, when Congress of Berlin decided so. (Browne, 2000) Many people thought that conflicts from the end of 19. century are solved and peaceful years were about to come. However, the biggest conflicts were yet to come. When in 1911 Italy defeated Turkey and took their territories, Balkan states realised that they have to do something, because if not, European powers would take all the Turkish territories, including those which were originally part of Balkan states. (Kallo, 2014) After long discussions ( since spring 1911 to February 1912), on 29th February 1912 Serbia and Bulgaria under the auspices of Russia signed an agreement3. Both states has made a deal about support against Ottoman Empire and Austria-Hungary too. (Kallo, 2014) In secret addendum, they decided how to split a land of Macedonia between each other and Russian tsar had to decide, how the borders should look like. (Kallo, 2014) Later, Greece and Montenegro joined the treaty and the anti-Turkish group called Balkan league was created. (Browne, 2000) Only Romania stayed aside, because they would have no profit from possible war. (Kallo, 2014) The war has started in October 1912. (Kallo, 2014) The process was so fast that Turks were defeated in 2 months (see Picture 3). On 3rd December 1912, peace talks between European powers started and Ottoman Empire had to give up territories on Balkan. (Kallo, 2014) In January, there was one more try from new government in Turkey, but it was pointless because their weakened army did not have a chance. After this treat, members of Balkan league wanted to divide the territories between each other. And here comes the problem. European powers could not agree with the division. For example for Austrians, it was unacceptable that Serbians would take an access to Adriatic sea and none of powers would admit that Bulgaria controls the Black sea straits. (Kallo, 2014) On 30th April 1912, London peace treaty was signed. (Kallo, 2014) During this conference, Balkan had to make a concession. Independent Albania state was recognized and Serbia lost their connection with see, so the powers got what they wanted. (Kallo, 2014) This conference also established how the borders of Balkan states should look like. (Kallo, 2014) Despite of the treat, states were still not satisfied with the result. Bulgaria and Serbia still could not make a deal about how to split the Macedonia territory. (Kallo, 2014) The conflict escalated in the end of June 1913, when Bulgaria attacked Serbia because of Macedonia areas and Greece because of Solun territory. (Kallo, 2014) In the beginning of July, Romania and Ottoman Empire joined the side of Serbia and Greece. (Kallo, 2014) Montenegro was fighting with the alliance too. Austria-Hungary and Germany proclaimed themselves as supporters of Bulgaria, because they wanted to weaken the influence of Russia on Balkan territory. (Kallo, 2014) Bulgaria was against big predominance defeated (see Picture 4). During peace talks in Bucharest from 10th august 1913, middle Macedonia, Kosovo and Sandzak have been granted to Serbia and south Macedonia plus west Thrace have been given to Greece. (Kallo, 2014) 3 Treaty of Amity and connection 32 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article Romanians got South Dobrudza and Ottoman Empire got east Thrace (see Picture 5). This might be a reason why Bulgaria during World war I. joined central powers, because they wanted to revenge themselves. 7 Civil war in Yugoslavia During 20th century, biggest state department, which was made by connection of many Balkan nations was Yugoslavia. After years of collaboration of Serbians, Croatians, Slovenians, Montenegrins, Macedonians and Bosnians, individual nations started to be dissatisfied. All these acts were influenced by the fall of central communist power resulting in ventilation of political power, which since the communism started could not be ventilated. (Browne, 2000) One of the main reasons of this war was growing nationalism. (Halaj, 2016) Not only the area of Yugoslavia, but area of individual states too, was mix of different religious and ethnical groups. (Halaj, 2016) And all of these groups were feeling oppressed and underrated, they wanted to fight for their better position and gain bigger respect. THere was an economical reason too. (Halaj, 2016) Economically developed nations Slovenia and Croatia were unwilling to pay dotations for economically less developed countries - because of this they wanted to leave the federation. (Pinteric, 2017) Serbia, politically stronger, but economically weaker wanted them to stay in federation, because without them, federation would bankrupt. (Pinteric, 2017) The conflict between Yugoslavia and Slovenia started in 1991. In the end of December 1990 there was a referendum in Slovenia, in which the themes about independence were discussed. (Halaj, 2016) 95% of participating people were for the independence. (Halaj, 2016) In April 1991, idea of making Yugoslavia a confederation was rejected. On 25th of June Slovenian government declared independence. (Pinteric, 2017) All these steps were leading to armed conflicts between Yugoslavian folk army and Slovenian units - a Ten day war4. (Pinteric, 2017) Federal army was bigger and with better weapons, but Slovenians wanted to fight on places, which are very hard to reach for federative army, which didn't know the land as good as Slovenians did. (Halaj, 2016) They managed to split federative units to smaller groups and then they forced them to give up one by one. (Halaj, 2016) The fight lasted only for 10 days; 8 Slovenian soldiers, 31 Yugoslavian Peoples' Army troops and 12 civilians/press were killed. (Gerbet, 2004) According to Gerbet (2004), on 7th July, leaders of Slovenian government and Yugoslavian government met in Brioni Island and signed Brioni declaration. All military operations were stopped. Following the situation in Slovenia, Croatians wanted to separate themselves from the federation too. First free elections were held there in 1990. (Halaj, 2016) The main goal of nationalist movement, which won the elections, was to make Croatia an independent country. Serbia was against the steps of Croatian government, because Serbian minorities living in Croatia had to face human rights valuations, according to Serbian government. (Halaj, 2016) 4 Slovenian war of independence, started in 27th of July 1991 33 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article After a stream of events the war started. Extremists from both sides started to kill the enemies. (Halaj, 2016) Riots started in Republic of Serbian country, which was mountainous part of Croatia near the border with Bosnians, where people of Serbian minority were living. (Halaj, 2016) Croatians started to build their own army, without any help of Yugoslavian folk army. On 19th of May 1991, there was a referendum about independence of Croatia. Independence was declared 6 days after the referendum. (Halaj, 2016) Month after becoming independent, Serbians occupied 1/3 of Croatia, including Dubrovnik, Sibenik, Zadar and many other big cities. (Halaj, 2016) Croatians from critical areas started to move into inland, because if they wouldn't move, they would have been killed by Serbians. Serbian civilians had to move to border areas too. On 8th October 1991, day after big explosion, which destroyed the parliament building, Croatian parliament cancelled all relations left between Croatia and Yugoslavia in belief that Yugoslavians made the explosion. (Halaj, 2016) Yugoslavians had the opposite view. Conflict continued and Croatians were pushed into a corner. During December, most of the European countries recognized the independence of Croatia. (Halaj, 2016) In January 1992, UN units came to critical areas. (Halaj, 2016) It was the first reaction of west countries against Serbian aggression. Yugoslavian folk units had to leave Croatia. (Halaj, 2016) In 22th may 1992, when Croatia became a member of UN, armed conflict continued much milder. (Halaj, 2016) Croatians with help of Kosovo separatists started to liberate occupied cities. In 1993, a conflict between Croatians and Muslims, who lived in Bosna has begun. (Halaj, 2016) Riots have been resolved by creating a new territory called Herzeg-Bosna - an area, where Croatians living in Bosnia belonged to. (Halaj, 2016) In the beginning of May 1995, Croatian army in cooperation with USA and NATO renewed the original borders, which were the same as Croatia had after the World War II as a part of Yugoslavia. (Halaj, 2016). During the liberations, many Croatians have been charged with terror on Serbian citizens. Later, attacks were thwarted by intervention of US diplomacy. (Halaj, 2016) Few months later, the Dayton Agreement was signed. (Halaj, 2016) Presidents of Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia took part in discussion. This agreement ended major riots in the area of Croatia. Like in Croatia, Bosnians started their fight for independence too. Territory of Bosnia is exceptional, because there are no majorities or minorities living there. (Halaj, 2016) Approximately the same number of Serbians, Croatians and Bosnians - Serbo-Croatian Muslims made the population of this area. According to this, population consisted of Orthodox, Catholic and Muslim religious groups. (Gerbet, 2004) Conflict started after a stream of events in Croatia, when tensions started between ethnic groups. (Halaj, 2016) During the first separate election in Bosnia, coalition of three parties, which included representatives of all ethnicities defeated Communist party of Yugoslavia. (Halaj,2016) Because of this, it was really hard to make the suggestion for division of the country. None of three nations was a minority, so the separation would not bring anything new. On 29th of February and 1st of March there was a voting concerning independence. (Halaj, 2016) Croats and Bosnians were for the independence, Serbians were against. Independence was declared on 7th April 1992, without the presence of Serbians, which were boycotting the result. (Halaj, 2016) In the same day, Serbians proclaimed Republic of Serbia. (Halaj, 2016) USA and 34 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article European union recognized Bosnia and Herzegovina immediately. (Halaj, 2016) Month ago, new republic became a member of UN5. War between those three sides was the bloodiest and the most chaotic conflict in Europe after the World War II. (Halaj, 2016) Peace agreements have been violated and UN efforts were pointless. Serbians were more dominant, because they have had better weapons and more people in army. (Halaj, 2016) Serbians started with genocide of Bosnian population. (Halaj, 2016) It was a planned mass execution of Bosniaks. The biggest execution took place in Srebrenica in 1995, when 8000 Bosniak men were killed here (Gerbet, 2004). Unfortunately, International Criminal Court in The Hague named only this event as genocide, many Croatians and Bosnians are against this decision, because there were many inhuman acts, which remained unpunished. (Halaj, 2016) Another big tragedy was Siege of Sarajevo. Serbian troops occupied Sarajevo thinking that Sarajevo is the main point for Bosnian army. They closed the Access roads and began the mass killing of non-Serbian people. (Halaj, 2016) Around 12 000 innocent citizens were killed. (Halaj, 2016) In 1993, the Vance-Owen plan was introduced. (Gerbet, 2004) The main idea was to divide Bosnia and Herzegovina to 10 pieces, while each of 3 nations would control three pieces and Sarajevo will be under control of UNPROFOR6 and later under control of all three nations (see Picture 6). This plan failed and conflict became more and more intensive. During this rivalry, we can see the first military intervention from NATO since its formation in 1949. (Pinteric, 2017) They shot down Serbian fighter plane above the no-fly zone. (Halaj, 2016) In March 1994, Bosnians and Croatians worked together to sign Washington Peace Agreement, which created common state formation, existing until today - Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. (Halaj, 2016) Number of fighting sides was reduced to two. In April 1995, NATO forced leaders of Bosniaks, Serbians and Croatians fighting in this war to stop the aggression and start the negotiations. It's written in Family encyclopaedia of World history (2000) that the war has ended with signing of Dayton agreement which ended up the Croatian conflict too. Final version, which included the solution of situation in Bosnia was signed in Paris, in 14th December 1995. (Halaj, 2016) These wars took care of extinction of Yugoslavia, which broke up into individual states. Politically, Serbia was proclaimed as the loser. They had to give up the impact on Montenegro, which became a separate state. 8 Kosovo war Kosovo war was a conflict between Yugoslavian units, which controlled Kosovo and Kosovo Albanian rebel groups, later called Kosovo Liberation Army with air support of NATO units and ground support by Albanian military. (Bacevich, 2001) Geographically, Kosovo is an area in eastern part of Serbia. It includes cities Priština and Kosovo pole, where the fight between the Ottoman Empire and Serbia with allies was fought. (Bacevich, 2001) During the war in 5 United nations - organisation, which promote international co-operation 6 United Nations Protection Force - first peacekeeping force 35 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, this area was kept quiet. IN 1996, rebels began with the destruction of Yugoslavian military bases. (Bacevich, 2001) They wanted to cancel the Yugoslavian supremacy. UCK7 was named a terrorist group, according to highest representatives in Yugoslavia. (Bacevich, 2001) Shooting between the leader of UCK, Adem Jashari with his group and Serbian police was so intensive that 60 Albanians died, including 18 women and 10 young men, who did not reach the sixteenth year of their life. (Bacevich, 2001) Conflict continues in many bloody incidents like this. Following the referendum from May 1998, Yugoslavian army and Serbian police started to clean the area. (Bacevich, 2001) They wanted to totally liquidate UCK units. After many bloody clashes, on 23th of September, UN expressed dissatisfaction with acts, which have been done in Kosovo. (Bacevich, 2001) A day later, NATO began to mobilize. (Bacevich, 2001) They wanted to be ready for possible military intervention. Under a threat of limited air strikes, which were approved by The North-Atlantic council, both sides signed a truce. (Bacevich, 2001) This truce did not last long and fight was renewed. (Bacevich, 2001) Massacre of Racak, when 45 Kosovo farmers were taken to a hill and killed, was convicted by the UN Security Council. (Bacevich, 2001) This was the point when NATO decided that conflict could be ended only with introduction of peacekeeping military force under the auspices of NATO (Browne, 2000). This was the only way how to save lives on both sides. In the beginning of February 1999, Secretary General of NATO started to negotiate with both sides about solutions, which could stop the conflict. (Bacevich, 2001) Discussions leaded to a consensus about autonomy for Kosovo, including the possibility of free and democratic elections. (Bacevich, 2001) This consensus was contained in the Rambouillet agreement, which was signed by USA, Great Britain and Albania. (Bacevich, 2001) Yugoslavians supported by Russia did not sign this, because they thought that this agreement violated the sovereignty of Yugoslavia. (Bacevich, 2001) After this, NATO would have to send 30 000 soldiers to new autonomy province inside Yugoslavia to maintain order in here. (Bacevich, 2001) Negotiations were not successful, which meant that military action from the side of NATO would be necessary. Yugoslavia, which was aware of the risk, announced a state of emergency and started a great mobilization of army and sources. (Bacevich, 2001) On 24th of March 1999, NATO started to bomb Yugoslavia. (Bacevich, 2001) Bombing lasted 10 weeks. (Bacevich, 2001) Almost all states of NATO except Greece were involved. (Bacevich, 2001) Their goal was to expel Yugoslavian army from Kosovo and replace them with peacekeeping units of NATO. (Bacevich, 2001) After that, they wanted to return the refugees, who had to leave their homes. (Bacevich, 2001) In April, conflict was drawing to a close. After the attack of air forces of NATO, Yugoslavians had to face 50 000 British ground troops with NATO flag. (Bacevich, 2001) Leaders of Yugoslavia understood, that there is nobody who would defend them, and when even Russia refused to help, they agreed with military forces, but under the patronage of UN, not NATO. (Bacevich, 2001) This step was the basis for the creation of peace agreement between Serbians and Kosovo Albanians. On 10 June, the North Atlantic Council ratified the agreement and suspended air operations. (Bacevich, 2001) On 12 June, the NATO-led KFOR8 7 Kosovo Liberation Army 8 Peacekeeping Kosovo force 36 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article began entering Kosovo. (Bacevich, 2001) This act meant the end of great conflict, but problematic situation continued. 9 Conclusion Every armed conflict, no matter who is fighting, negatively affects mankind history. Unfortunately, Balkan area was an area, which was affected most. For and ordinary person petty disputes cost the lives of hundreds of thousands people. The main reason, why Balkan people were fighting so rough could be the lack of self-realisation. These nations was almost all the time controlled by other states and nations. During the period of Turkish rule, the anger escalated and exploded in 20th century. Who knows, what would happen if the first kingdoms of Balkan nations would have continued to these days. Conflicts in the end of ninety's were the bloodiest since the World War II. has ended. People were fighting so intensive that they were not interested in loses. They acted on their enemies like they were not humans. At present, humanity is still recovering from massive killings produced from Yugoslavians in belief of keeping the federation alive and from individual nations in belief of freedom, which they deserved. The role of international organisations and global powers should be to prevent states from such a catastrophic conflicts. Mistake is that during the biggest conflicts in mankind history organizations and global powers concentrated themselves on their own goals, they had their own interest. Because of that they often made steps, which could provoke rivals, which are arguing between each other for some reason. If the main interest of global powers and international organizations will be to protect innocent people and citizens of problematic states, number of destructive conflicts will be much lower. References 1. BACEVICH A. J., COHEN E. A. :War Over Kosovo: Politics and Strategy in a Global Age. New York, 2001 2. BLYUKHER O. R., LIPKIN M. A., PASCHENKO N. T., PROKOPENKO L. YA.: Istoriya Rumynii s drevnikh vremon do nashikh dney. 2005. 3. BROWNE, J.: Family Encyclopedia of World History. Bratislava, 2000 4. Halaj, Dušan, Mgr., CsC. Žilina,2016 (interview) 5. GERBET, P.: Budovani Evropy. Praha: Karolinum, 2004 6. NIKOLOV A., CVETANSKI C.: History of Bulgaria. Sofia, 2007 7. PINTERIČ, U.: Short history of Balkans: Yugoslavian aspects. Novo Mesto, 2017 8. TEICHMAN, M.: Dejiny Srbska. Praha, 2005. 9. WEITHMANN, M.V.: Balkan: 2000 let medzi Vychodem a Zapadem. Praha: Vyšehrad, 1996 10. http://encyklopedia.sme.sk/c/1644706/bitka-na-kosovom-poli.html 11. http://historyweb.dennikn.sk/clanky/detail/na-ceste-k-prvej-svetovej-vojne-3-cast#.WEBsSlwSLIV 12. http://www.burnpit.us/2015/09/battle-frigidus-river-east-romans-defeat-west-romans-reuniting-empire 37 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article Appendix Picture 1 This map shows us how the Balkan territory looked like between years 1373-1395. We can see large number of small kingdoms, on which was Serbian kingdom divided after Stefan Dusans death in 1355. The most important kingdom, kingdom of Lazar Hrebeljanovic is portraited with purple colour. 38 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article Februar / February 2016, letnik / volume 1, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 13-26. Picture 2 ( u * Duklja P"l»P ^ • * Priština Skopje Kroia Thessalonica Kastoria / ^ • Janina * Trika la Arta 0_500 1000 2000 1 km , A î 1 à . On this Picture we can see, how the fight between Serbians and Ottomans looked like. The battle took place 5 miles from Pristina. Red arrows are showing usthe Serbian army and Black arrows the Ottoman army. Lazar army was defeated and Serbians ende dup with Turkish supremacy for almost 500 years. 39 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article Picture 3 This Picture shows us how the individual forces of Bulgaria, Serbia, Greece, Montenegro and Ottoman empire were moving during the first Balkan war in 1912. Strategy was really hard to understand and it was no easy to predict steps of the opponent. 40 Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Februar 2017, letnik / volume 2, številka / number 1, str. / pp. 27-43. Članek / Article Picture 4 Petrova« o \ z/ZU \ Pljevlja 05 / -ž. o / ^ Kruševac ■P V Negotin* ( 'Zafečar * v H I Lom v» r _ jt^ Belogradchik Craiova M ' - CXJiL <- -j / O4 Kosovska . / T/ " n Mrtrovioa / KoJtrovgrad >* • A/cr~ „ . \ r"0 n^f Sofia. \ c G p „Peč Priština ^ O» ^ n ~ O • ^ • Vranje O Cetinje / / * -ÀV Serres ^ >p ! Xanthi Komotini A Alexandroupoli V Vo V ^■^Catalca Çorfu r Enez Ov (AARM* Gelibolu çSrkôy . J