Post-War Transition in the North Adriatic Border Area (1945–1954)

Abstract

Kroz konkretne primjere iz arhivske građe u ovom se članku kritički analizira nacionalni pristup povijesnih narativa u sjevernojadranskom prostoru nakon Drugog svjetskog rata te se ukazuje na potrebu transnacionalnog (odnosno anacionalnog) te „isprepletenog“ iščitavanja povijesti (entangled history) pograničnih područja. Upravo se u tim područjima, koja su podložna čestim promjenama (država, granica, vlasti, itd.), manifestiraju oblici višeslojnih, fluidnih, nedefiniranih, hibridnih te ambivalentnih identifikacija stanovništva, pa se dosadašnji etnocentrični povijesni prikazi čine neadekvatnim, odnosno nedovoljnim za dubinske analize širih društvenih fenomena u kompleksnim i tranzicijskim procesima koji su uslijedili nakon Drugog svjetskog rata. Stoga se može zaključiti da skorija povijest Istre nudi značajan uvid u procese izgradnje nacija i država, pružajući pritom bogat materijal za istraživanja kroz nove metodološke pristupe i perspektive putem kojih je moguće detaljnije analizirati međuodnose između društvenih i političkih aktera te fleksibilne strategije i prakse, podložne stalnim redefinicijama, u kojima su nacionalne identifikacije često samo sredstvo u postizanju stanovitih ciljeva.

Using specific examples from archival sources, this article critically analyses the national approach to historical narratives in the post-World War II Upper Adriatic region and highlights the need for a transnational (or rather, non-national) and entangled approach to the history of the borderlands. Indeed, these territories, subject to frequent changes in state sovereignty, were characterized by forms of multilayered, fluid, undefined, hybrid, and ambivalent identifications of the population. Therefore, ethnocentric historical representations in times of crisis and transition appear inadequate or insufficient for in-depth analysis of broader social processes.

This article focuses on the case study of the multilingual countryside of Istria after World War II, during the period of negotiations over the new Italian-Yugoslav borders. In particular, it considers the dynamics of the categorization of the Istrian population from above (the new Yugoslav authorities) and the reactions from below (the ordinary people in everyday life). As a result, social and political actors pursued a variety of flexible strategies and practices, subject to constant redefinitions, in which the possibility of national identification was often only an instrument to achieve specific and contingent goals.

The transition in the postwar period thus underlines the specificity of borderlands, where the determination of (exclusive) national or linguistic belonging was a matter of situation. Not only were the forms of identification fluid and multifaceted, but the families themselves were intertwined by centuries of coexistence. Consequently, the efforts of the new authorities to divide the inhabitants of the newly annexed regions into exclusive national groups produced ambiguous results. Indeed, fluctuations in identity categories are a constant feature of Istrian history and have remained visible in almost all population censuses up to the present day.