Congressional Medal of Honor winner Peter Tomich

Petar Tomich

Dear all,

Below is an article from today's New York Times about Croatian-American Peter Tomich, who won the Congressional Medal of Honor -- the highest US award for bravery -- his actions during the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour. He was awarded the medal posthumously.

Unfortunately, the NYT does not mention that he is Croatian.

regards
Sanja

**********
New York Times
April 1, 2003

A Medal Both Coveted and Orphaned

By CLYDE HABERMAN

BEFORE this war is over there will be acts of heroism, perhaps some so remarkable that they will merit the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest decoration for valor.

They are precious, these medals. There have been 3,459, starting with the Civil War, but they are increasingly rare. Only two have been given since the Vietnam War, both for actions during the debacle in Somalia a decade ago. Both were also posthumous. That's how it usually is. From World War II on, these medals, more often than not, have gone to the dead.

So each deserves attention, especially when one of them stirs a dispute intense enough to land before a federal appeals court. That is what happened in New York recently, a case involving someone dead for more than 61 years.

He was Chief Watertender Peter Tomich, a sailor who had been in charge of the engine room aboard the Utah, a battleship that was part of the United States fleet at Pearl Harbor. After the Japanese attacked on Dec. 7, 1941, the torpedoed Utah capsized in a matter of minutes.

Sailors scrambled to abandon ship. Not Chief Tomich, 48. He raced below deck to keep the boilers from exploding and to get his crewmen out. Most made it. But 64 were killed, including the chief.

In 1942 Chief Tomich was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor for his courage. It would prove the start of a long journey for a military decoration in search of a home, a tale first told in this space four years ago.

First, some background:

Chief Tomich was born in 1893 in Prolog, a Balkan village that is now part of Bosnia. He came to America as a young man, lived in Queens and, in 1917, joined the Army at Fort Slocum. In 1919, he received his discharge papers. But 10 days later, he enlisted in the Navy from Newark. As next of kin, he designated a cousin in Los Angeles. There were no other known relatives in this country.

For years, the issue has been who has proper custody of his medal.

When that cousin could not be found, the decoration became something of a Flying Dutchman. It was displayed on a World War II destroyer named in Chief Tomich's honor. Then it made its way to the Utah State Capitol, and finally to the Navy Museum in Washington, where it has been on display for the last few years.

According to the Congressional Medal of Honor Society, a group in South Carolina with a charter from Congress to "protect, uphold and preserve the dignity and honor of the medal," the Tomich decoration is the only one in the last century never to have been presented to someone. That, the Navy Museum says, is not quite accurate. The curator, Edward M. Furgol, says the 20th century produced at least one other unclaimed medal, from 1904.

Why quibble? The point is that the Tomich medal is a rarity.

And that troubled the New York Naval Militia. Because Chief Tomich had spent time in New York, the militia adopted his case, convinced that the government's intention all along — not to mention custom — was to hand the medal to a relative if one could be found.

  THE Navy, in the militia's view, never really bothered to look. So its judge advocate general, J. Robert Lunney, a lawyer in White Plains and a rear admiral in the Naval Reserve, started the hunt himself. In 1997, he went to Prolog, searched church records, interviewed villagers and found cousins who said they were willing — no, honored — to accept the medal.

But the Navy insisted that the decoration stay put at the museum. "It just puts its feet in cement and refuses to do anything about it," Admiral Lunney, 75, said the other day. "Why not, as a patriotic gesture, recognize a true American hero by delivering the medal to the next of kin?"

Three years ago, the Queens County surrogate made Admiral Lunney the administrator for Chief Tomich's estate. In that capacity, he sued the Navy in Federal District Court in Manhattan. But the judge ruled against him, saying the courts had no jurisdiction. In mid-February, that decision was upheld by a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York.

That, Admiral Lunney acknowledged, seems to be the end of the line, unless the Navy should change its mind. "It's a just cause," he said. "It's a fair thing for our government to do. This was a guy from Europe, but this American ship was his home. This was his life."

Along with dozens of shipmates, Chief Tomich remains entombed in the Utah's rusty hulk. "Peter Tomich," Admiral Lunney said, "is still on watch."

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/01/nyregion/01NYC.html 

>>

 Cancer Survivor Urges Women To Perform Self-Exams

Breast cancer attacks people of all races and cultures, which means every woman needs to know how important early detection is.

In this month's Loving Partners, NewsChannel5's Alicia Booth reported that one survivor is hoping other women will identify with her and take her message to heart.

Ksenija Dejanovic immigrated to Ohio from Croatia in 1994, and it's a move that may very well have saved her life.

She and her husband knew America was a much better place to fight breast cancer than her home in Croatia.

"Although doctors are smart and up to date with the literature, there's always shortage of medication," she said. "And by the time I was in chemotherapy, I thought there (was) no way I could get this there."

Dejanovic's battle was grueling, but she said she was lifted by thousands of prayers from both Ohio and Croatia. She said she feels it's her duty to stress the importance of self-examinations to her friends and to other women.

"And all my female relatives who until now didn't have anybody in the family with breast cancer -- now I'm the first one, the chosen one, I guess," she said.

Dejanovic is a role model for women of other cultures who may not have had access to the breast cancer education women have in the United States.

Her oncologist at University Hospitals, Dr. S. Krishnamurthi, agrees and said it's important to spread the word about early detection.

"Breast cancer is by and large a curable disease," Krishnamurthi said. "Most women with breast cancer are cured and the earlier it's caught, the better the chance for a cure."

Dejanovic has been cancer-free for about two years now. She lives a healthy, simple life with her husband, Mijo, and her 6-year-old son, Ante.

"Life is beautiful and worth living," she said.

Dejanovic said that in Croatia, there isn't even enough paper to print information about breast cancer. She said Americans shouldn't take things like that for granted.

Those who have questions or want a free shower card that shows women how to perform self-exams should call the University Hospitals Ireland Cancer Center hot line at (800) 641-2422.

Women are urged to perform self-exams on the 5th of every month.

Source: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ibsys/20030407/lo_wews/1567006 

CroatianTask Force

In short, Hrvatska matica iseljenika is organizing a volunteer program where the young adults from Croatia and abroad will help with the ecological reconstruction in Croatia. 

This year the program includes reconstruction of ethnological museum, botanical garden and gallery of the monastery Sveta Marija in Zaostrog(http://www.gradac.hr) and participation in the eco programs of Hrvatske Šume (CroatianForrests). Lodgining will be in the monastery  http://www.gradac.hr/zaostrog/zaostrog-povijest.htm located only 50 meters from the coast.

The participants are expected to pay for their airfare to Zagreb, while accommodation, food and activities are free of charge. All applications and two recommendations need to be received by June 13, 2003 and should be sent to:

Hrvatska matica iseljenika
gdja. Nives Antoljak, leader of TF 2003
Trg Stjepana Radica 3
10000 Zagreb
Hrvatska
tel. 385 1 61 15 116
fax. 385 1 61 11 522
e-mail: nives@matis.hr  

This project takes place from July 13th - August 2nd. Various activities, including entertainment and sports are planned. Weekend trips (Dubrovnik, Medjugorje, Brac, Hvar.....) will also be organized.

http://www.matis.hr/hr/task_force/2003.htm 

Hrvatska matica iseljenika tradicionalno organizira dragovoljni obnoviteljski program TASK FORCE u kojem mladi iz domovine i iseljeništva rade na ekološkoj obnovi Hrvatske. Mladi hrvatski iseljenici i njihovi prijatelji iz brojih zemalja svijeta već nekoliko godina sudjeluju u obnovi ekološki zapuštenih dijelova pojedinog hrvatskog kulturno-povijesnog prostora. Kao što je poznato, TASK FORCE je započeo u jeku ratnih stradanja 1992. godine, a hrvatska ga iseljenička mladež nastavlja održavati i u mirnodopsko vrijeme. 

Do sada su TASK FORCE projekti uspjesno ostvareni u Vocinu, Gornjem Brgatu kraj Dubrovnika, Skradinu, Daruvaru, Istri, na Plitvickim jezerima, na otocicu Galovcu kraj Zadra i u Arboretumu u Trstenu i u Motovunu. Svake se godine našsem obnoviteljskom programu u Hrvatskoj pridruze i prijatelji hrvatske mladezi iz cijelog svijeta, od mladih Amerikanaca i Kanadjana do mladih Francuza i pripadnika mnogih drugih naroda.

Ovogodišnjim projektom nasu pomoc cemo usmjeriti na uredjenje etnografskog muzeja, botanickog vrta i galerije u samostanu Sv. Marije u Zaostrogu (http://www.gradac.hr) i na ekoloskim programima HrvatskihSuma u okolici. Smjestaj je predvidjen u samom samostanu http://www.gradac.hr/zaostrog/zaostrog-povijest.htm udaljenom 50m od mora.

Sudionici sami placaju troskove na relaciji inozemstvo-Zagreb-inozemstvo. Troskove sudjelovanja u samom programu snositce organizatori. Pristupnice se primaju najkasnije do 13. lipnja 2003. Uz pristupnicu je potrebno proslijediti (e-mailom, faksom ili postom) i dvije preporuke, tj. preporuku sveucilišnog profesora, ucitelja ili poslodavca i preporuku, ako je to moguce, jedne osobe ili društva ili crkve u okviru hrvatske zajednice.

U okviru TF-a priredjuj se razlicita zabavna i sportska dogadjanja. Vikendom se organizira obilazak kulturnih, povijesnih i prirodnih znamenitosti kraja u kojem se boravi (Dubrovnik, Medjugorje, Brac, Hvar.....). Ukoliko se javi dovoljan broj zainteresiranih organiziratce se i tecaj hrvatskog jezika i/ili dramska radionica. 

Zaostrog - Task Force 2003. 

Prijave: zainteresirani mladici i djevojke, od 18 godina i stariji, mogu se javiti do 13. lipnja 2003. na sljedecu adresu:

Hrvatska matica iseljenika
Ms. Nives Antoljak, voditeljica TF 2003
Trg Stjepana Radića 3
10000 Zagreb
Hrvatska
tel. 385 1 61 15 116
fax. 385 1 61 11 522
e-mail: nives@matis.hr  

 Croatian Rugby

Does anybody know more about it?

Two FIRA-AER Tests are being played this weekend as Super 12 rolls on and Europe gets back to club rugby.

In the Division 2 Pool B matches Belgium play Slovenia in Liège. Belgium, who beat the Netherlands in a friendly earlier this year, and Slovenia are bottom of their division. Belgium lost to Croatia and Switzerland. Croatia lost to Croatia and Denmark.

In Division 3 Pool B Malta, the top side, play Bosnia, the bottom side in Sarajevo. It is a match which Malta should win. Bosnia lost heavily to Luxembourg whom Malta beat 34-6 last week.

Matches

Belgium vs Slovenia in Liège
Referee:  Mohammed Erraji (Morocco)
Touch judges: Joseph Verhoest (Belgium), Slovenia

Bosnia vs Malta in Sarajevo
Referee: Nereo Dordolo (Italy)

Source: http://www.planet-rugby.com/LATEST_NEWS/story_26961.shtml

Kostanic and Talaja Winning

Jelena Kostanic and Silvija Talaja

ESTORIL, Portugal, April 7 (UPI) -- Dutchman John Van Lottum earned the biggest win of his career Monday at the venue where his professional tennis career began eight years ago.

The veteran, who celebrates his 28th birthday on Thursday, won a battle of wills with top seed Jiri Novak of the Czech Republic, collecting a 6-7 (5-7), 6-4, 7-5 first-round victory at the Estoril Open.

Eight years ago, Van Lottum played his first professional match at the Estadio Nacional venue.

"This is really ironic," said the 105th-ranked player who lost two of three matches this season entering the tournament. "When I played here in a Satellite (event), Novak was the guy who won it."

The Dutchman went straight to his cell phone to tell his family how he claimed his first top 10 victory.

Van Lottum ended it on second match point, profiting from a final Novak error after the pair had traded breaks deep in the third.

"I was very tight at the end," Van Lottum said. "I'm just happy to have this win, we'll just see what happens."

Novak gained the top seed Sunday when Juan Carlos Ferrero of Spain pulled out before the draw with a lingering ankle injury. The Czech was devastated after now going without a clay title for more than 18 months.

"I was fighting, playing good tennis," Novak said. "But I didn't take my chances. I had so many chances to break in the second, but I couldn't make them. I lost concentration. It's tough to lose like this."

Fifth seed Tommy Robredo of Spain finally got a victory over 1996 finalist Andrea Gaudenzi, who lost the final here seven years ago to his powerful training partner Thomas Muster.

Robredo, twice a loser to the Italian veteran, secured a place in the second round with a 6-3, 6-1 win.

Argentina picked up two victories, with Jose Acasuso ousting Spain's David Sanchez, 6-3, 6-4, and Agustin Calleri routing 18-year-old Portuguese qualifier Diogo Rocha - playing in his first ATP event - 6-1, 6-0.

In women's play, French third seed Virginie Razzano beat German Barbara Rittner, 7-6 (7-5), 6-0; Croatian Silvja Talaja knocked out sixth-seeded Klara Koukalova of the Czech Republic 6-4, 6-4; and No. 8 Czech Iveta Benesova topped Tatiana Poutchek of Belarus, 6-3, 6-1.

Other unseeded winners were Jelena Kostanic of Croatia, Rossana Neffa De Los Rios of Paraguay and Stephanie Cohen Aloro of France.

Neffa De Los Rios advanced when her opponent Marta Marrero retired at 3-3 in the first set with a left ankle strain.

Cohen Aloro posted a 6-2, 6-3 win over young Russian Maria Kirilenko, the reigning U.S. Open Junior champion.

Kirilenko, who is allowed to play only 10 tournaments due to age restrictions, was helped into the tournament when men's star Yevgeny Kafelnikov asked for a wild card to be given to his compatriot.

http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030407-054501-3687r
Copyright © 2001-2003 United Press International

CROATIABETWEEN EUROPEAN INTEGRATION, WESTERN BALKAN AND IMPARTIALITY

AndelkoMilardovic,Ph.D. 

PoliticalScience Research Center, Zagreb

www.cpi.hr 

1.EU INTEGRATION

Since internationalacknowledgement in 1992 until today, the Croatian foreign policy the object areEuropean integrations. That object has been emphasized and is emphasized byformer Government and by new coalition government. Despite that, until recentlythe Government didn’t manage to achieve inter -party agreement on Europeanintegration Strategy, and it was accomplished at the end of 2002 by acclamationof Declaration in Croatian Parliament. Impartially from what may be the bestresults in Stabilization and association process, comparing with othercountries, Croatia didn’t find itself among ten new candidate countries in EUEastern enlargement process. At Copenhagen Summit Croatia was not traded as acountry which could be in enlargement process with Bulgaria and Romania in 2007.

That promptedCroatian political elite on diplomatic action and acclamation of Declaration andundergoing of application for full membership by March 2003.

The application hasdomestic and foreign political reasons.

Domestic politicalreasons are related to forthcoming elections. In a case of acceptance,Government of the Prime-minister Račan would achieve a great success inforeign policy which could probably have impact on forthcoming elections. But,in a case

Of subtraction thisGovernment will have to bear consequences and the question of alternativestrategy for the future will be opened.

The good side of theapplication is that it will show a real position of Brussels who will have togive its final answer, either positive or negative.

Positive answer basedon intern consensus, would ask for development of integration strategy withprecise dynamic, distribution of tasks, distribution actor roles, budget andcost of integration, benefits of integration for Croatia, losses and obligationby referendum.

In a case of negativeanswer the government will have to develop the scenario to avoidcontra-productive effects of ten to fifteen years by the time Croatia becomefull EU member.

That time should beused on developing an Alternative or our own concept of impartiality. Thatconcept will be discussed among leading Croatian intellectuals on Seminar“Croatia-neutral State?” which will be held on 23^rd January 2003in Bezanec Castle in Hrvatsko Zagorje.

2.GEOPOLITICAL SITUATION, IDENTITY AND POLITICAL REALIZM

Positive and negativeScenario of Croatian future and her position in the globalized world has to bedeterminate by her geopolitical situation, which is constant in domestic andforeign politics. It is a permanent fact which has to be taken as dependent inprogramming and implementation of future scenario.

According to that, itis possible to identify Croatia as a country between Central Europe,Mediterranean and Balkan. Three components identify her geopolitical andcultural identity: Central European, Mediterranean and Balkan component, ofwhich geographically

 Balkanhas a smallest impact.

Until January 3^rd2000 the emphasis was on first two components but after arrival of coalitionGovernment the priority was given to a Balkan component. Objections to an oldGovernment were that it favored European integration; Central European andMediterranean identity but it acted totally Balkanian. New Government, on theother side to has emphasized cooperation with Balkans as an integrated part ofStabilization and accession process and the Mediterranean and Central Europeangeopolitical and cultural component where put in a second plan and a prioritywas given to cooperation with Western Balkan countries (In economy, culture,sport and etc).

In the politicallanguage by officials in Brussels Croatia is treated as a part of Western Balkanregion. Since 1997 until 2000 in “European herald” magazine Croatia ismentioned as an integrated part Western Balkan region, Yugoslavia minus Sloveniaplus Albania. In this region exist interweave between Western (EU and U. S. A.),Russian and Islamic interest. EU foreign politics treats this region as one. Theobject of Stabilization and association Agreement is implementation ofstabilization in the region and association, if it ever became possible. The EUpolitics does not take into account the results of each individual country. Itis occupied with the collective approach. Individual accession model, as itseems, will not be easily accepted. The reasons why Croatia didn’t enter infirst enlargement group in Copenhagen are strictly political. The WesternBalkans is treated as Europe’s “black hole”, the region withoutestablished rule of law and with great problems with corruption, organizedcrime, illegal migrations and trafficking of human beings. It is treated in thisway and actually isolated so that it doesn’t undermine EU construction, and inattempt to prevent eventual effects of the “black hole” on her system EU isbuilding a stronger politics towards Balkan countries and barbarians who couldundermine the EU principals.

Finally, in allScenarios of EU Future, either official or of think tanks, Croatia is seen asWestern Balkan country. These are some of the examples, Western Balkan and a newEuropean responsibility. Strategic paper presented at special meeting “Club ofthree and Western Balkans” (Brussels 29 ­ 30, June 2000); CARDS assistanceProgram to the Western Balkans – regional strategy paper 2002 – 2006(European Commission. Forward studies unit. Horizontal issues). Western Balkanin 2004. Assistance, cohesion and new European borders. The paper by independentinstitute ESI – Berlin was presented to Javier Solana on November 5^th2002 in Brussels. Taken into account, Scenario confirms thesis of politicalreasons of Croatian exclusion from Copenhagen enlargement process and acollective, instead of individual approach to accession, if ever becomesplausible.

ESI Scenario anticipate crisis inWestern Balkans 2004 caused by reduction of assistance. In a part of Scenario“ European Union and the crisis 2004” the Western Balkan countries arehardly taken into account in a view of future EU enlargement, and the evidenceof that approach was shown in Copenhagen treatment of the Balkans. It isstressed that:

ťFrom 2004 to 2006, most countries inthe region will receive relatively little EU aid, whatever political orinstitutional reforms they undertake and irrespective of their progress up theStabilization and Association ladder. Unless something changes, there will alsobe little argument for taking the needs of the region seriously in the nextprogramming cycle (2007-13). The Balkans will continue to depend on thedevelopment and humanitarian aid budget, and will find itself competing with thecountries of the Southern Mediterranean and the Middle East and with new crisisareas as they emerge around the globe.

Without a serious commitment from theEuropean Union, the Western Balkans will find itself increasingly isolated fromthe developments unfolding all around it, from Slovenia, through Hungary,Romania and Bulgaria, and south to Greece. Its capacity to join the Europeanproject will only decrease over time. While in the enlarged Europe, the newgoals will be economic cohesion; development and labour mobility, in the Balkansthe focus will narrow to issues of crime, corruption and border management. Ifthis is Europe's only response to the crisis of 2004, then the most probablefuture of the Balkans is to remain an island of instability in the heart ofEurope, exporting migrants and importing peacekeepers. (ESI, November 2002, p.20). ť

EU foreign politics has commonstandards of “Europeanization” of new potential candidate countries anddeveloped regional politics. One of these regional politics is toward WesternBalkans. But, either Croatia hasn’t developed clear strategy whose objectivesare European integrations neither it comply prerequisite for full membership,partly because it’s own fault and partly because of existing scenarios of EUfuture.

The question here is: What can we do ina case they don’t accept our application for full membership and we subtractscenarios, which tend to relate Croatia and her own future with a future ofWestern Balkan? Therefore, alternative scenario must be developed includingacclamation of permanent impartiality on Constitutional basics.

3. IMPARTIALITY

If the application for full membershipis going to be subtracted, and if the Government is rejecting a concept, whichtends to relate Croatia with Western Balkan scenario, an alternative strategy ofextrication from the Balkans must be developed. This strategy should necessaryinclude acclamation of impartiality as a concept of self- reinforcing, buildinginstitutions based on rule of law, implementation of common European standardsand best practice, anti-participation in war conflicts, abstention from NATOmembership, and reinforcement of Constitutional statute which forbids anyassociation with former Yugoslavian countries, and promotion of peace byRepublic of Croatia.

In a political history termimpartiality had deferent meanings, but always resulting from constellation ofpower and relations. Since establishment of international relations between thestates in 1648 it was interpreted as abstention from conflicts and taking partsin violations, respect of sovereignty and independent foreign politics forexample, freedom of choice in leading its own foreign politics.

The system of impartiality is changingthrough the centuries, especially after a fall of Berlin wall. Withglobalization of politics the old concept of impartiality has changed, andgradually is defined in new context of power and relations.

The right on impartiality, in terms ofglobalized politics, has to be maintained, as a choice of a freedom. Forexample: Croatia has never been forced to join EU and NATO, but EU scenariorelates it to Western Balkan. Impartiality, hence, means a freedom of choice,which defines our own future. Any declared impartiality should be acknowledgedby international community, and in that case Croatia should “experience”second international acknowledgment if declare neutrality.

As I said, through the historyimpartiality was result of constellation of power and relations. Examples are:Switzerland, Austria, Sweden, Finland and Ireland. Switzerland is an example ofpermanent, Constitutional based impartiality. Austria is an example ofimpartiality created as a result or consequence of 2^nd World war.Since 1955 until 1994 Austria experienced total impartiality. That time was usedon institutional building and self-reinforcing, and at the end Austria joined EU.Austria is not a NATO member, but is candidate country and is pleading forredefining of impartiality under new conditions. Sweden, Finland and Ireland areall EU members but not NATO members. Therefore, in globalized world there arestill some neutral states, and some countries are neither members of EU or NATO.Perfect example is Switzerland.

According to that, if Croatia currentlycannot become full EU member, and there is no need to enter NATO, as senselessorganization, it should declare neutrality related to future conflicts andpermanent impartiality.

“Permanent neutrality is clearlydifferent from neutrality by the fact that permanent neutrality ischaracteristic of the state as a subject of international law, as defined byConstitution and international Agreement, and opposite, term neutrality isrelated to war.” (Source: Vladimir Ibler, International civil law dictionary,Zagreb, Informator, 1987, p. 319). Raymond Aaron has also written aboutdifferent types of impartiality in book “Peace and war among the nations”(Zagreb, Golden marketing, 2001, p. 548.)

The idea of freedom of choice and peaceare in foundation of impartiality. So if Croatia is going to declareimpartiality it won’t be in any relation with isolationism. Impartiality isbased on the assumption of freedom of choice to integrate, according to nationalinterests, in those global institutions in which, for example, Switzerland is amember, but is not a member of European Union and NATO. Finally, impartialityexclude isolationism. Croatian concept of impartiality in globalized world,should therefore, be the concept of institutional self reinforcing, comparativewith EU standards, based on rule of law so that Croatia in time became adesirable EU partner.

Since the end of bipolar structure ofthe world and fall of Berlin wall NATO has became an institution occupied withplanning its own purpose. In NATO strategy1999 it is stressed that a role ofNATO is a protection of North-Atlantic alliance countries. Whom from? Who is aglobal enemy today? It is also stressed that NATO’s second role is managingthe crisis caused by NATO to vindicate its purpose. Beside that, after aFatherland war, Croatia is not longer willing to participate in wars and wish todeclare itself as Republic of peace. Parallel with that Croatian membership inNATO would be senseless since NATO is interested only in the military bases inMediterranean, as a place for protection of capital interests, interests offoreign companies, and as a source of equipment and goods, and trained soldiersfor artillery meat. Croatia should offer military bases and in exchange shouldreceive a expensive equipment, bordellos, prostitutes, infectious diseases,drugs, military police and “State within the state“, from NATO. The fact is,there is no any country who could pose a threat to Croatia besides NATO, andNATO members for shure will not declare war to Croatia. Slovenia is not a NATOmember, Italy, as old member, excludes that idea, and Hungary, after joinEuropean Union is not a question. The only threat could pose Serbia. But ifCroatia has succeeded to organize army in the early 1990 and defend fromEurope’s third military forces at the time, it is not a question whether itcould do that in the future with built military organization and well equippedarmy? Hence, there are no reasons for Croatia to become a NATO member. As astate which proclaims peace, based on impartiality, Croatia should developpolitics towards Serbia to prevent threats.

Impartiality includes strong economyinstitutions and membership in, according to national interests, global economyinstitutions. Globalization of economy and politics has greatly changed theconcept of territorial sovereignty of European Union members.

In the invitation for Seminar which isgoing to be held at the end of January 2003 it is stressed: “Today the natureof impartiality has changed especially in accordance with new nature ofconflicts and threats in international relations. Strong integration processesand even stronger inter-dependence of the world and states progressively arechanging the main principles of neutrality, as for example, the principal ofsovereignty and national interests. Neutral states continually are changingtheir behavior in international relations in accordance with real neutrality,but they stay committed to basic idea which enable them a great freedom foractions”.

Globalization, as a main form inintegrated the world, does not exclude impartiality, but impartiality needs tobe adopted according to conditions in globalized world. Globalization is basedon neo-liberalism, the idea of freedom, just as neutrality is based on idea offreedom. Hence, terms globalization and neutrality are not in contradiction ifthe right of freedom of choice, freedom of individual and society to choose itsown future is respected. Our choice is a way towards European Union and iftemporary we can’t reach it and we don’t want to be related with WesternBalkan impartiality is a way for Croatian politics in globalized world. But weneed International community to acknowledge this way and they will if Croatiasuggests that option.

 Dalmat Yacht

Op-ed

It's got to have SOMETHING to do with Croatia. It is in Croatia and it's named Dalmat and is in our possession. My question is who owns it and who was able to sell it? I did some research scroll down and you'll find it.

Nenad

April 04, 2003

Italy and Croatia at odds over Habsburg yacht
From Richard Owen in Rome

AN ITALIAN politician who restored the last royal yacht of the Habsburg Empire after finding her lying derelict in a Croatian shipyard says that he is being prevented from taking the vessel to Italy because the authorities have belatedly declared it a national treasure.

Gianfranco Cozzi from Genoa, a Christian Democrat deputy in the Italian parliament, is a collector of naval curiosities. He said that he had come across the yacht, the Dalmat, at a shipyard in Split.

“She had been dumped like a lump of old iron, he said. “I saved her from being scrapped, but now Zagreb is refusing to let the yacht leave out of a nationalistic whim.”

Signor Cozzi, who runs a port services business, had planned to add the yacht to his collection of historic vessels at Santo Stefano al Mare, near San Remo on the Italian Riviera. He told The Times that he had restored about a hundred vessels, including Brigitte Bardot’s yacht Triton.

“The Habsburg yacht has nothing to do with Croatia beyond that she happened to end up there,” he said. “There is no case for blocking her export. It was built in Trieste, which was then part of the Austro-Hungarian empire, but is now Italian.”

The 270-tonne Dalmat, which is 45m (147ft) long, was built at the San Rocco shipyard in Trieste in 1896. Her most celebrated moment came in 1914 when she was used to carry the body of Archduke Franz Ferdinand back to Vienna via Trieste after he was assassinated in Sarajevo.

Signor Cozzi said that he did not know how the Dalmat had ended up in Split. “I paid €500,000 (£344,800) for her, and I have since spent €5 million restoring her.”

Adolfo Urso, Italy’s Deputy Minister for Foreign Trade, said that his Government would take up the case in view of the vessel’s historical value.

Source:http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-633577,00.html

Dalmat - Fata, becameCroatian Vial 1943, then Admrialty Yacht Orjen 1945, later floating restaurant Istranka, "at Split, still in existence and currently for sale (1998) - the only existing relic of the former AH Navy! (Austro Habsburg)

http://www.gwpda.org/naval/ahfate.htm#yachts

Post War Distribution of Austro-Hungarian Warships

by Erwin F. Sieche, Vienna, Austria.

On 29 October 1918 A-H officials started ceasefire negotiations which ended in the ceasefire regulations of Villa Giusti signed on 3 November. The end of hostilities was scheduled for 4 November. The naval implementations asked that on 6 November 3 battleships, 3 light cruisers, 9 destroyers, 12 torpedo boats, 1 minelayer and 15 submarines - the most modern units of the A-H navy - had to surrender unconditionally off Venice to allied forces. All other units were to concentrate in Buccari (Bakar) and Spalato (Split). In the same time world politics had made a sharp turn, anyway, the 600 year old Habsburg empire had disintegrated over night. On 29 October the South Slav National Council of the Serbs,Croats and Slovenes had declared at Agram (Zagreb) the new SHS state (abbreviation for Srbska, Hrvatska, Slovenska). The very next day at the main A-H naval base Pola (Pula) sailors councils

took over the power and mutinies spread. As Austria-Hungary had lost her coast to a new state, Emperor Karl I. (King KarlIV. of Hungary) ordered the whole A-H fleet including all coastal facilities to be handed over to representatives of the new South Slav National Council. The change of flags occurred on 31 October 9 am, most naval personnel left Pola to return to their newborn states. The new SHS state - not ratified by the allied powers - declared itself to be on the side of the allies.

With the lack of personnel to man the ships and fulfil the implementations of Villa Giusti there was no chance of surrendering the nucleus of the fleet off Venice on 6 November. The Italians reacted immediately and did not stop a long planned operation against the A-H fleet in Pola. In the morning hours of 1 November the Italian frogmen Maggiore del genio navale (Major of the Naval Engineers) Raffaele Rossetti and tenente medico (Medical Lieutenent) Raffaele Paolucci sank the new flagship of the SHS navy Viribus Unitis - not yet renamed in these few hours - with a limpet mine dubbed 'Mignatta' (Leech).

The turmoil in the coastal areas determinated the Italians to conquer as quickly as possible as much as possible. 3 November they landed at Trieste, 4 November at Abbazia (Opatija), Fiume (Rijeka), Parenzo (Porec), and Zara (Zadar); 5 November they conquered Pola (Pula). The Italians forced the Yugoslavs to lower their flags and raise the Italian tricolore on all ex-A-H warships. The Yugoslavs succeeded only in putting together nucleus crews and transfer the battleships Radetzky and Zrinyi to Sette Castelli Bay where they put themselves under custody of the US Navy.

The Austro-Hungarian dreadnought PRINZ EUGEN during speed trials in 1913.

On 16 November 1918 the conference of the allied admirals at Venice, Italy, defined the control zones on the Dalmatian coast as follows: Italy had the Istrian peninsula and Pola; USA the zone of Split (Spalato); England and France had the joint control of the Bocce di Cattaro (Boka Kotorska). Warships of the respective other nations were to join in to secure overall control.

On 23 March 1919 the Italians transferred a group of ex-AH warships to Venice, where they took part in a bombastic V-Day naval parade held on 25 March. This where: the battleships Tegetthoff, Erzherzog Franz Ferdinand, the cruiser Admiral Spaun, the destroyers TSÇtra and Csepel, the torpedoboats Tb

80, Tb 81, Tb 86, Tb 92, Tb 98 and the submarines U 5, U 21, U 28, U 40. After the parade these ships where moored at Venice to corroborate the Italian rights of occupancy.

So the ex-AH warships were not interned by the allies - as had been the German High Seas Fleet at Scapa Flow -, but were simply idle hulls under allied custody. The further fate had to be negotiated in Paris. Only the French received back the submarine U 14 and recommissioned it as Curie on 17.7.1919. In the mean time the hulked cruiser Kaiser Franz Joseph I. who served as a floating ammo deposit in the remotebay of Zanjica, outside of the Boka Kotorska, capsized and sunk in a heavy gale on 17 October 1919. On the same occasion the two torpedoboats Tb 12 and Tb 52 were beached and wrecked at Sette Castelli Bay near Spalato.

The Austro-Hungarian pre-dreadnought RADETZKY fully dressed during the sport's week 1908 at Abbazia/Opatija.

Regarding the further usage of ex-AH warships we have to keep in mind that the main interest lay in the modern German warships and submarines. Obsolete, worn out units in a remote area like the northern Adriatic were of no substantial interest for the main naval powers. At the end of January the allied naval council at Paris declared what was to happen with these units. Most of them were to be scrapped within 12 months, Italy and France should receive some units as compensation for war losses and some of the associated powers like Greece, Portugal and Romania should receive a batch of torpedoboats. Yugoslavia was the great loser and was reduced to a third rank coastal navy.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

The distribution was as follows:

Battleships/predreadnoughts:

*       England: Habsburg, Arpad, Babenberg (sold for scrap to Roman Steelmill Vaccaro & Co, 1922/23 scrapped at Cantiere navale di scoglio olivi, the former AH naval arsenal, now an Italian firm) Erzherzog Friedrich, Erzhzerzog Ferdinand Max (sold to Italian scrappers; broken 1921 at La Spezia resp. Genoa)

*       Italy: Tegetthoff (after numerous interventions of the allied  naval council scrapped not before 1924/25 at Leghorn/La Spezia); Radetzky, Zrinyi (November 1920 handed over by the US Navy off the 3-mile-zone to Italy, scrapped 1926 resp. 1921); Erzherzog Franz Ferdinand (scrapped 1921 at Ancona)

*   France: Prinz Eugen (after demolition trials sunk in 1922 as gunnery target off Toulon); Erzherzog Karl (sank en route to scrapping in Bizerta Lagoon/Sidi Abdallah due to heavy weather; 1921 scrapped in situ)

Coast defenders:

*   England: Monarch, Budapest (sold for scrap to Roman steelmill Vaccaro & Co; scrapped in 1921)

Cruisers:

*   England: Kaiser Karl VI., Sankt Georg, Kaiserin und Koenigin Maria Theresia, Admiral Spaun, Aspern, Szigetvar (sold to Roman steelmill Vaccaro & Co, scrapped respectively 1921 to 1923 at Napoli, Taranto, Elba, Venezia, Elba)

*   Italy: Helgoland (End of 1919 towed by the French to Bizerta Lagoon; 19.9.1920 commissioned by Italy as Brindisi; 22.-26.10. transfer from Bizerta to La Spezia, enlisted to the scout squadron 'Gruppo Esploratori'; 3.7.1921 left Brindisi as stationery in the Levant, 16.7. in Istanbul; 3.7.1924 returned from the Levant; 6.2. - 7.3. Mission to Libya; 7.3. Brindisi in; 15.3. with the Italian King and the minister of the navy at Fiume/Rijeka for the celebration of the Italian annexation of Fiume; 21.3.-31.8.1925 Brindisi; 1.9.1925 - 31.3.1926 Taranto; 26.7.1926 decommissioned; from 1.7.1927 staff ship of the I. torpedo division; 20.11. reserve division; from 6.6.1928 staff ship of the special division;  12.4.1929 for special mission to Albania understate secretary of foreign affairs on board, 12.16.4.1929 Durazzo/Durresi;  17.-26.5.1929 port calls in the Levant; 25.11.1929 decommissioned;  from 26.11. accommodation ship at various ports like Ancona, Pola, since 19.12.1934 Trieste; 11.3.1937 stricken, probably scrapped at Trieste)

Saida (19.9.1920 commissioned by Italy as Venezia; repairs of the machinery; commissioned 5.7.1921 after refit; in October at Taranto final ending of machinery repairs; 31.12. stationery at the Levant;  3.1.1922 took over naval command of the Dodecanese at Marmaris;  16.30.4.1922 coverage of the retreat of Italian troops from Anatolia;  14.5.-31.8.1922 Izmir; 1.-4.9.1922 Rhodes; 5.9.1922 - 18.3.1923 Izmir; 11.3. Messina in; 21.3.11923 to La Spezia for repairs; since 1.11.1924 enlisted to the scout squadron 'Gruppo Esploratori', but steady repairs; 1.12.1925 active service; 8.1.1926 transferred to Taranto, special colonial mission; 16.3. minister for the colonies , to Derna/Libya, minister unshipped; 1.4. Benghazi shipped in; 4.4. Naples in; 11.-16.4.1926 Tripolis; 20.-24.4.1926 La Valletta/Malta, than Naples; 25.3.1927 at Naples Count of the  on board for special mission to Ethiopia; 5.5. Massaua,  14.5.Assab, 15.5. at Djibuti Count of the Abruzzes unshipped for mission to Addis Abbaba; 2.5. shipped in, left Djibuti; 30.5.  Massaua; 10.6. Naples in; 26.11. left for port calls in the Levant; .12. Taranto in; from 5.3.1928 at La Spezia staff ship of the II.  torpedo division, left 5.3. for manoeuvres in the southern Adriatic;  3.6. - 21.10 stationery at the Levant, then reserve division of the scouting forces in the southern Adriatic; 4.7.1930 to Genoa for decommissioning; since 16.3.1935 accomodation ship; stricken 11.3.  1937, probably scrapped in Genoa.)

*   France: Novara (March 1920 towed by French tug from Gjenovic/Boka  Kotorska to Bizerta; because of water inrush during the towage beached in Brindisi harbour, salvaged after 5 weeks; towed to Bizerta Lagoon for further repairs; 12.-17.10.1921 towed from  to Toulon, renamed Thionville; rearmed and refitted; gunnery and torpedo training ship of the Mediterranean division;  disarmed 1.5.1932; stationary training ship at the artillery pier  the naval arsenal of Toulon; 1932 decomm., acommodation ship at Toulon, sold for scrap 1942)

Old torpedoships, destroyers and torpedoboats:

* England: Panther, Leopard (sold for scrap to Roman steelmill Vaccaro Co, broken 1921 at Messina)

*   Italy: Zara, Spalato, Sebenico (scrapped 1921), Meteor, Blitz, Komet,  Planet, Trabant, Magnet, Scharfschuetze, Uskoke, Turul, Csiku˚s,  Velebit, Dinara, HuszSÇr (II), Warasdiner (all of them probably scrapped 1921 at Pola) , Balaton (Tatra joined in the Italian V-Day parade of 24.3.1919;  27.9.1920 renamed Fasana resp. Zenson, 16.10.1920 both towed to Pola,  not commissioned according to worn out condition but cannibalised;  stricken 5.7.1923, scrapped),

Csepel, Orjen (renamed 26.9.1920 in Muggia resp. Pola; Muggia ab 10.3.1927 stationery at Shanghai, attached to cruiser Libia, patrols along the entire Chinese coast, stranded 25.3.1929 due to dense fog  Amoy island on the Finger Rocks - total loss, crew saved by Japanese steamer Matsumoto (Maru?);  Pola was modernised at Cantiere navale di scoglio olivi, Pola, using spares of TSÇtra and Balaton, 1924-1928 decommissioned respectively reserve at Taranto, from March 1931 colonial service in Libya,  9.4.1931 renamed Zenson(II), 1931/32 port calls in the eastern Mediterranean, then Venezia, 1.5.1937 stricken, scrapped)

Triglav (II), Lika (II), Uzsok (26.9.1920 renamed Grado, October 1920 towed by Italian tug Titano to Messina, towed July 1921 from Messina to Pola, refit at Cantiere navale di scoglio olivi and at Trieste, from October 1924 fleet service at Venezia, stricken 30.9.1937; the same with Cortellazzo, 1927 fleet service in Venezia as machinery training ship, 1928, 1931 and 1932 stationery in Libya,  since November 1933 machinery training ship in Venezia, 1933 port calls in Greece and in Cyrenaika, 1937 e, 5.1.1937 stricken; the same with Monfalcone, 1928-1931 fleet service at Pola,  1931/32 training ship, port calls in the Dodecanese and Libya,  August/September 1937 patrols in the straits of Sicily to intercept ships carrying supplies from Russia to Spanish Republicans, after that fleet service at Venezia, stricken 5.1.1939).

*   France: Satellit, Pandur, Reka (1921 scrapped), Dukla (20.9.1920 renamed in Matelot Leblanc, August 1921 transferred to Toulon,  Mediterranean Fleet service with the 1. Torpedo-Squadron, January to April 1923 refit at Toulon using spares of the Fasana and Zenson cannibalised by the Italians, fleet service, from 6.2.1924 to 30.5.1925 out of service because of bad condition, after repairs Mediterranean Fleet service with the 3. Torpedoboat-Squadron, 1928 with the 9. Torpedoboat-Squadron at Bizerta, stricken 1936,  condemmned 4 May 1936, 5 October 1936 in Bizerta sold for scrap to the SociettÇ Klaguine).

*   Greece: Ulan (renamed Smyrni; stricken 1932)

Coastal and high seas torpedoboats:

*   England: Tb 8 - 10, Tb 14, Tb 18 (sold for scrap to Messina) Tb 50 E, 51 T, 53 T, 55 - 59 T, 62 T, 63 T, 64 - 68 F, 70 - 73 F (sold for scrap to Cantiere navale di scoglio olivi, Pola).

*   Italy: Tb 1 - 7 (scrapped 1921; Tb 3, 7 Guardia Finanza/Customs until 1925) Tb 20, Tb 22 - 25, Tb 27, Tb 29 - 32, Tb 37, Tb 39, Tb 40 (scrapped 1921; Tb 22, Tb 24, Tb 25, Tb 29, Tb 32 Guardia Finanza/Customs until 1925).

*   France: Tb 13, Tb 15 - 17 (scrapped 1921)

*   Kingdom SHS (since 1.6.1929 kingdom Yugoslavia): Tb 21, Tb 19, Tb 36, Tb 38 (commissioned as D 1 - 4 until 1924/25, D 2 until 1941, fate ?)

Tb 60 T, Tb 61 T, Tb 69 F, Tb 54 T (commissioned as T 9 - 12; T 9, 10, 12 decommissioned 1924, T 11 decommissioned 1938 and scrapped)

Tb 76 T - 79 T (commissioned as T 1 - 4; T 1 since April 1941 Italian T 1, 7.12.1943 Croatic T 1, 1945 Yugoslav Golesnica, service until 1959. T 2 decommissioned 1939, scrapped. T 3 since April 1941 Italian T 3, 16.9.1943 German, commissioned 15.8.1944 as TA 48, sunk 20.2.1945 at Trieste by allied bombs, salvaged 1946, 1947 sold for scrap. T 4 total loss in 1932 after stranding /where?/).

Tb 87 F, 93 F, 96 F, 97 F (commissioned as T 5 - 8; T 5 since April 1941 Italian T 5; since 7.12.1943Croat T 5; since 1945 Yugoslav Cer, until 1963, scrapped. T 6 since 2.3.1941 Italian T 6, 11.9.1943 scuttled off Cesenatico. T 7 since April 1941 Italian T 7, since September 1943 Croat T 7, 25.6.1944 with mixed German-Croat in battle with British MTBs, ran aground on Murter - total . T 8, since April 1941 Italian T 8, 10.9.1943 off Dubrovnik /or Olip?/ sank by German bombs).

*   Romania: Tb 75 T, 76 T, 80 T, 81 T (commissioned as Viforul, , Vijelija, Zborul; all stricken, Zborul in service since i.D., scrapped 1959/60)

Tb 82 F, 83 F, 84 F (commissioned as Naluca, sunk 1944 in Constanza harbour by Soviet aircraft; resp. Zmeul, in service until 1958, scrapped 1959/60; resp. Fulgerul, 8.2.1922 capsized during transfer         off European coast of Turkey in heavy gale, total loss).

*   Greece: Tb 92 F, 95 F (commissioned as Panormos, stranded in March 1928 off Aegina island - total loss; resp. Proussa, heavily damaged off Corfu by German air attack 4.4.1941, scuttled by crew)

Tb 98 - 100 M (commissioned as Kyzikos, scuttled on 25.4.1941 at Salamis Naval Arsenal; resp. Kios, heavily damaged by German air off Vougliameni on 23.4.1941, scuttled by crew; resp. , escorting Zakynthos sunk on 26.4.1941 by German air attack).

*       Portugal: Tb 85 F, 86 F, 88 - 91 F (commissioned as Zezere, Ave, Cavado, Sado, Lis, Mondego; Zezere and Cavado ran aground in tow of the Portugese tug Patrao Lopez during transfer from Venice to Lisbon on 29.12.1921 near Bone, Algeria - both total loss; Ave left Venice 21.3.1921, in Lisbon on 5.5.1921, decommissioned 30.7.1940; Sado left Venice 21.5.1921, in Lisbon 5.8., decommissioned 30.7.1940; Lis left Venice 21.3.1921, in Lisbon on 5.5.1921, commissioned 31.12.1921, decommissioned 6.4.1934; Mondego left Venice 21.5.1921, in Lisbon 5.8.1921, decommissioned 14.1.1938).

Submarines:

*   Italy: U 1, 2, 11, 15, 17 (scrapped in Pola), U 5, 21, 28, 32, 40 (scrapped in Venezia), U 27 (scrapped in Fiume/Rijeka), U 10 (scrapped in Trieste), U 29 (scrapped where?)

*   France: U 4, 22, 31, 41, 43, 47 (scrapped where?)

Special service ships:

* England: minelayer Chamaeleon, Salamander (sold for scrap to Messina)

* France: minelayer Basilisk

* Italy: Torped supply ship and submarine mother ship Gaea (ex-NDL Fuerst Bismarck, ex-Russ. Moskwa; 1919 Italian state railways; 1920 chartered by Mssrs. Cosulich S.T.N. as emigrants ship to the USA, renamed San Giusto; after first voyage in 1921 idle and scrapped in 1924), Torpedosupplyship Pelikan, accomodation hulk Kronprinzessin Erzherzogin Stefanie (ex-turretship, scrapped 1926 at Trieste), fleetcoalers Pola, Teodo (renamed Fianona, Barbarina), fleettanker Vesta (ex-Etelka, renamed Marte), admiralty yacht Lacroma (ex- torpedo cruiser Tiger, scrapped), paddlewheel yachts Miramar, Taurus (scrapped; resp. ex-Nirwana, renamed Marechiaro, since 1928 official statejacht Aurora, sunk after torpedo hit by German E-boats S 54 and S 61 off Taranto on 11.9.1943), Yacht Dalmat (renamed Fata, since 9.1943 Croat Vila, 1945 admiralty-yacht Orjen, renamed Istranka,  later floating restaurant Istranka at Split - the idle hull still exists and is for sale - apparently this is the only real existing relic of the former AH Navy), harbour yacht of Pola Lussin (ex- torpedocruiser, ex-stoker training ship, renamed Sorrento,  passengership in the Gulf of Naples, stricken 1928), salvage ship Herkules (renamed Teseo, sunk 13.12.1931 in heavy gale), pumpship Pluto (renamed Volosca), harbour guardship Mars (ex-case mate ship Tegetthoff, scrapped).

*   Kingdom SHS (since 6.1.1929 Kingdom Yugoslavia): Harbour guardship Kronrinz Rudolf (ex-turretship, renamed Kumbor; 1922 sold for scrap), accomodation hulk Kaiser Max (ex-casemate ship, renamed Tivat, later Neretva, scrapped 1927), repairship Cyclop (renamed Perun), salvage ship Gigant (renamed, decommissioned 1929 and scrapped).

Sources:

Franz F. Bilzer, Die Torpedoboote der k.u.k. Kriegsmarine von 1875-1918, Graz 1984, page 107 ff. Franz F. Bilzer, Die Torpedoschiffe und Zerstoerer der k.u.k. Kriegsmarine 1867-1918, Graz 1990, 116 ff. G. Fioravanzo/P.M. Pollina/G.N.G. Riccardi/ F. Gniffetti, I Cacciatorpediniere Italiani 1900 - 1971 (The Italian Destroyers 1900 - 1971), Rome 1971, page 171 ff Giorgio Giorgerini/Augusto Nani, Gli Incrociatori Italiani 1861 - 1970 (The Italian Cruisers 1861 - 1870), Rome 1971, page 399 ff Mihai Georgescu, ex-AH torpedoboats in Romanian service, in Modelism, Bucharest/Romania, # 3-4/1994 Paul G. Halpern, The Naval War in the Mediterranean, USNIP 1987 Paul Kemp, Grossbritannien und die Aufteilung der k.u.k. Flotte 1918-1923 (Great Britain and the distribution of the A-H fleet 1918-1923), in MARINE - Gestern, Heute, # 2/1985, p. 41ff., # 3/1985, p. 81 ff Arthur von Khuepach, Endschicksal der oesterreichisch-ungarischen Flotteneinheiten (fate of the A-H fleet), in Marine-Rundschau # 10/1938, page 750 ff, # 11/1938, page 830 ff, # 12/1938, page 920 ff Georg Pregel, Die SHS-Kriegsmarine in den Jahren 1919 - 1923 (The SHS-Navy in the years 1919-1923), in MARINE - Gestern, Heute, # 1/1987, page 1 ff. Erwin Sieche, Zeittafel der Aufloesung und Uebergabe der k.u.k. Kriegsmarine 1918-1923 (Timetable of the disintegration and surrender of the A-H Navy 1918-1923), in MARINE - Gestern, Heute, # 4/1985, p. 129 ff., # 1/1986, p. 12 ff Erwin Sieche, Verbleib der oesterreichisch-ungarischen Kriegsmarine nach 1918 (postwar fate of the A-H navy after 1918), in Schiff und Zeit,Germany, # 43 Milan Vego, The Yugoslav Navy 1918-1941, in Warship International # 4/1982, page 342 ff for further sources see Warship International # 2/1966, page 207

© 1997 Erwin F. Sieche, Vienna, Austria

Note on crest.
The official emblem of the Austro-Hungarian Navy shows the Habsburg crown decorated with two cap ribbons and a naval anchor.

http://www.cronab.demon.co.uk/ah3.htm

 Correction to Siege of Dubrovnik

I would like to point an error in quote in bold typeface:"This was the first time in its history that Dubrovnik had had to depend on arms to defend its freedom," he said. "In the past, it had always relied on diplomacy, trade, or even payments of money to maintain its freedom."

I would like to remind that during short existence of Serbian Kingdom, and their dynasty of rulers, Serbs stated no less than fifteen (15!) wars against Dubrovnik Republic; namely in 1172, 1196, 1215, 1228, 1252, 1253, 1254, 1265-1268, 1275, 1301, 1302, 1317, 1318, 1325, 1328. Needless to say, they lost all of them.

This info is obtained from http://www.hr/darko/etf/et111.html . Best regards,

Tomislav Petricevic
wolf@email.atlasf1.com