INDEPENDENT STATE OF CROATIA (1941-1945) AS A SUBJECT OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH

Premda je za razdoblje Drugoga svjetskoga rata odavno stvoren organski historiografski okvir, čini se da prošlost NDH nije postala prošlost kao i svaka druga već se preko nje reflektiraju moderni politički pregibi. U povijesnoj objektivizaciji NDH isprepliće se kognitivni i etički nivo čitanja prošlosti. U radu se prikazuju različiti modeli analize koji uključuju širenje i sužavanje okvira istraživanja i sukladno tome razumijevanja prošlosti NDH.Although the historiography has widely researched the period of World War II, it seems that Independent State of Croatia (NDH) has not yet become a closed and finished period of the past, because current political disputes influence views about it. NDH is still widely discussed in questions such as responsibility for the past events and collective identity. Historiography about NDH has undergone several phases. The official historiography before 1991 took approach which can be called "marxists". This approach clearly and unconditionally distinguished "left - right", "fascism - antifascism" and "progressive - reactionary". NDH was explained as a criminal and genocidal state which was established on the ruins of European democracy and as a result of fascist and nazi superiority. At the same time, in the Croatian political emigration appeared another approach to the history of NDH. Most persons who researched this problem were gathared around review "Hrvatska revija", and their approach can be viewed as nostalgic and apologetic. NDH is viewed as a state and nation, historical realization of the independent Croatian stare. In order to defend its existence, the romantic element of free and independent Croatian state was especially emphasized. Such approach is limited, because it tries to skip that NDH was created in accordance with the Ustasha racists principles. These two approaches are in fact very sirnilar, because they try to explain NDH from only one point of view. After 1990 explanation of NDH could no longer be based on such exclusive and singular approaches. Historians could also access new archival documents about this subject. Currently, the historiographical conflict about NDH is connected with question of war victims, especially the suffering of Jews in NDH and the question of uniqueness of holocaust. War victims cannot be left out from the research. Nevertheless, historians should always be aware of all groups and nations who were victims of the tragical historical events. It would be wrong to proclaim that only one approach to the research of NDH is correct and all other wrong. Each historian chooses his own approach to this subject, and, along with this, all its positive and negative elements. Still, it is obvious that all approaches do not offer objective and serious answers about that complex theme