The paper deals with the thesis that contemporary Croatian national identity relies heavily on war and war discourse, which is deeply imbued with nationalist interpretations of history. In this discourse, Serbs play the role of antagonists, who are still perceived as the "other", i.e. permanent enemy in a symbolic and political sense. War and nationalism in this context have been inextricably linked since the breakup of Yugoslavia, and their presence in the public space has not only not weakened with the passage of time, but has shown continuity and a tendency to strengthen, without serious questioning within the dominant political and social discourse. An additional impetus to this development was given by the rise of new right-wing and far-right political parties, like Homeland Movement (Domovinski pokret), Croatian Sovereignists (Hrvatski suverenisti) and Bridge (Most), who took over the fundamental elements of the nationalist and war rhetoric of the Croatian Democratic Union, and further radicalized and articulated them. Thus, the war narrative did not remain exclusively a historical event, but became an active political resource used to mobilize voters, legitimize political demands and redefine relations towards minorities and neighboring states, which is accompanied by historical revisionism. It is particularly significant that such a discourse is institutionalized through legislative decisions, educational programs, memorial practices and cultural policy, which ensures its long-term reproduction. Despite the considerable time gap since the end of the war, the war and nationalist narrative shows no signs of weakening, but is increasingly successfully transmitted to generations that did not experience the war. This points to the fact that the war functions as a fundamental identity myth, which maintains the logic of permanent conflict, and thus hinders the development of a plural and inclusive society.
Veronika Vasilić (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: