42 research outputs found
Амерички поглед на прилике у Црној Гори 1918–1919
The Furlong Dossier and reports represent but one view of
the United States policy toward Montenegro, at a time when the official policy had not yet crystallized. The United States interests in Montenegro in 1918—1919 stemmed from its duties as an Allied nation, from the reports of civil strife in Montenegro, from the application of the Wilsonian principles (one of which called for the restoration of Montenegro) and from the fact that in a broader context the question of Montenegro had become an aspect of the heated
Adriatic question. The United States had no other political objectives
than to see that justice was done to Montenegro and its people. Initially, its sympathies lay with King Nikola and his government
with which it had exchanged diplomatic representatives. It was
against this background that Major Furlong performed his dity in
Montenegro. His views reflected a fleeting moment in American
relations with Montenegro. But in time the higher Allied interest
came to prevail and, like the other Allies, the United States found
itself on the side of the unionists and Serbia
Defying De-Stalinization: Albania’s 1956
Drawing on recently declassified Albanian, Soviet, East German, and Western archival sources, as well as a rich historiography on Nikita Khrushchev\u27s secret speech and the Hungarian revolution of 1956, this article investigates the little-known events of 1956 in Albania. Rejecting de-Stalinization, the Albanian Communist leader Enver Hoxha was able to vindicate his position against Yugoslavia\u27s brand of socialism abroad, fortify his rule at home, and claim more aid from Moscow, Beijing, and the Soviet bloc. This article discusses the Tirana Party Conference of April 1956, treating the Albanian Party of Labor (the Communist party) as an “information society.” The article assesses deliberations over security and ideology at the highest levels and demonstrates how tiny Albania came to embody, in exaggerated form, both the promises and the perils of socialist exchange, in addition to mirroring the profound inconsistencies of Khrushchev\u27s de-Stalinization campaign