Slovenian-Croatian boundary: backgrounds of boundary-making and boundary-breaking in Istria regarding the contemporary boundary dispute

Određivanje granica u Istri je stari pothvat. Ustvari, nije prestao čak ni danas. U posljednjih nekoliko stoljeća granice na istarskom poluotoku doživjele su značajne promjene (posebice nakon propasti Mletačke Republike 1797. godine). No Istra je također zbog prijepora oko teritorija Trsta nadaleko poznata kao jedno od problematičnijih graničnih područja u Europi u poslijeratnom razdoblju. Prema mišljenju autora, ovaj problem je jedan od četiriju glavnih suvremenih graničnih problema između Slovenije i Hrvatske. Ostala tri su Kozlerova granica oko rijeke Dragonje (Rokave), nejasni pojmovi u austrijskim popisima u Istri, te priče o partizanskim naseljima pod vojnom upravom. No postoje i drugi važni aspekti koji su značajno utjecali na razvoj ovoga spora, ali u ovom radu pozornost će biti usmjerena na prije navedene probleme. U skladu s time analiziraju se učinci ishoda spora oko tršćanskog teritorija i njihov utjecaj na suvremene granične probleme. Upozoravanjem na materijalne i psihološke učinke ovoga spora na suvremene bilateralne odnose te njegovom analizom također se otkriva pozadina nikad odgovorenog pitanja – zašto je lingvistička granica oko Rijeke Dragonje (Rokave) koju je predložio Kozler postala granica od nacionalnog značenja. Iako je danas navedena granica često osporavana, teško je očekivati da će obje strane odustati od granice koju je jednom odredio laik. Unatoč snažnim prijeporima u slovenskim javnim medijima vezanim uz pitanje treba li međudržavna granica biti na rijekama Mirni i Dragonji, u radu je utvrđeno da je izbor granice u dolini rijeke Dragonje zapravo slovenski. Argumenti se temelje na opsežnoj analizi kartografskih materijala, relevantne literature, dokumenata i statističkih podataka.Boundary-making in Istria is an old undertaking. It has actually never ceasesed, not even today. Istrian peninsula has thus undergone substantial boundary shifts during the last couple of centuries (especially after the Venetian demise in 1797). But Istria carries its worldwide fame also due to one of probably the harshest disputes on the post-war European grounds – the Trieste territory dispute. In author\u27s perspective, this dispute is one of the four main corner-stones of the current Slovenian-Croatian boundary dispute. The remaining three include the Kozler\u27s boundary around Dragonja (Rokava) River, the ungraspable notions of Austrian censuses in Istria, and the narratives of partisan settlements on military jurisdiction. However, there are other very important aspects which significantly shaped the development of the dispute, but we will focus at assessing the importance of the aforementioned ones. In this sense, the analysis of the effects of the outcome of the Trieste dispute and its implications to the contemporary interstate dispute is set forth. By unveiling its material and consequently its psychological effects upon the contemporary bilateral relations, its analyses simultaneously reveals backgrounds of never answered question, why Kozler\u27s proposed linguistic boundary around Dragonja (Rokava) River turned out to become a boundary of national character. Though nowadays disputed, there is absolutely no chance for both involved parties to substantially draw away from once decisively drawn line of a layman. Despite the fierce battle of words in Slovenian public media on whether should the interstate boundary be placed on Mirna (Quieto) or Dragonja Rivers, it will be argued here that the actual choice of the Valley of Dragonja as a boundary is by all means Slovenian. The arguments are based on extensive analyses of cartographic materials, relevant literature, documents, and statistical data