Search

The British historian and publicist, Robert William Seton-Watson (1879-1951), rendered important services to the cause of the nationalities of the former Austro- Hungarian Monarchy ever since the first two decades of the 20th century, including during the Paris Peace Conference (1919-1920). During the 1920s, Seton visited the three states repeatedly: in April-June 1923 (including Austria); the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (and Austria) in May-June 1925, Romania and Czechoslovakia in June 1927 and the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, Romania and Czechoslovakia in June-August 1929. His visits were determined by the desire to learn at the very scene of events about the political happenings taking place in the three states in the first years after the war. Seton continued to follow the evolution of events in the three successor states during the next years. The events in Skupština in June 1928, when a Serbian parliamentarian shot Radić dead and wounded two other Croatian parliamentarians, horrified Seton-Watson. As far as Romania is concerned, the winning of the elections, in 1928, by the National-Peasant Party brought great hopes for the future of this country, but they were dashed by the failure of the national-peasant governments, carried out against the background of the world economic crisis. Only Czechoslovakia maintained a democratic regime, being, however, also undermined by internal contradictions between Czechs and Slovaks and by the centrifugal tendencies of the Sudeten Germans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Romanian Case Law Review / Revista Română de Jurisprudenţă is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The beginning of the 20th century brought along a new period of tension in the Romanian-Greek relations, caused by the escalation of interethnic conflicts in European Turkey. Romania's involvement in the recognition of the rights of the Aromanians by the Ottoman state led to the breakdown of diplomatic relations with Athens between 1905 and 1911. In this context, on 30th May/12th June 1910, on board of the Romanian liner "Emperor Traian", which arrived in the port of Piraeus, serious events were taking place, which further strained the relations between Romania and Greece. The acts of vandalism carried out on the ship and the mistreatment of the crew created the premises for an escalation that could go as far as taking all the measures that the Romanian government considered necessary, in relation to the interests and dignity of the state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The visits undertaken by representatives of the royal family in Transylvania in the interwar period have a special meaning. The physical presence of members of the dynasty of Romania represented an act of affirmation of the legitimacy and suzerainty over the territory acquired in 1918. This was even more necessary under the circumstances that after the First World War the political circles in Hungary launched a sudden campaign of an unprecedented vehemence and scale, asking for the support of the international public opinion and of the governments of the Western countries, for the revision of the Trianon Treaty, which had 'mutilated' the Hungarian state borders, aiming at the restitution of Transylvania which had been unfairly 'torn off' the body of Hungary. Also, one should not forget that the Transylvanian Romanians had lived for more than two centuries under an imperial regime in which the myth of 'the good emperor' had been deeply engraved in the collective mentality. A new symbolic image meant to replace the picture of the former sovereigns had to be engineered. Through the major reasons that it fulfilled in the national movement of the Transylvanian Romanians in the modern age, through its exceptional contribution to the defense and development of the national culture, by its institutions and great scholars, the town of Sibiu individualized itself strongly and forever in the Romanian history. Therefore, the town could not be omitted by the royal family in its visits in Transylvania and, indeed, the presence of the sovereigns of Romania is repeatedly reported in Sibiu in the first interwar decade. The study aims to capture the way the residents of Sibiu reacted to these events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The events preceding the First World War triggered a revival in Romanian foreign policy, oriented for three decades towards the Central Powers. The actions of the Vienna Cabinet -contrary to Romania's interests -during the Balkan Wars (1912-1913), but especially the situation of Transylvanian Romanians, under the rule of the dualist Hungary, prompted the beginning of Romania's reorientation to the Entente. The great powers of the Entente, especially France and Russiasought to take full advantage of the deterioration of the Romanian-Austro-Hungarian relations. Russia was most interested in weakening the influence of Austria- Hungary in the Balkans and to draw Romania on the side of the Entente. As a result, the visit of Russia's Tsar in Constanţa on 14 June 1914 produced the most vivid agitation in German and Austro-Hungarian diplomatic circles due to the advances that the powers of the Entente made in Romania. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Danube, one of the major rivers of Europe, had a special significance in the life of the peoples of the continent. Connecting Central Europe and the Orient, the Danube was the most important European trade axis. For Romania, the river has always had a special significance. On the occasion of the peace Congress of Paris (1856), the European Commission of the Danube was founded, an organization established in order to draw up the applicable navigation and police regulations on the entire course of the river. At the same time, however, the plenipotentiaries of the great powers assembled in Berlin (1878), after a series of rather marginal negotiations, left open the question of the regulation of the navigation on the Danube and the Black Sea Straits, although the latter was indeed the key to the whole “Oriental Question". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Romania’s foreign policy after 1877 was characterized by efforts meant to consolidate its independence and to obtain recognition at international level. To ensure the stability and continuity of the dynasty, the Government in Bucharest took into account, first and foremost, the necessity of regulating the succession to the throne. The eventuality of the proclamation of the Kingdom was circulated both in the country and abroad immediately after the consecration of its independence. The issue, being openly addressed by Bismarck, has found prompt and unequivocal support, nevertheless, in Vienna, the idea was not accepted. Austro-Hungary has also delayed for half a year its acceptance with respect tothe Kingdom only to seize concessions in relation to the Danube and to ensure the Romanian side’s promise to join the „Zweibund”. Having the support of Germany, Brătianu and Carol were able to avoid Haymerle’spressures, so that Vienna will be placed in front of the fulfilled fact when, on 14/26thMarch 1881, the Assembly of Deputies and the Senate in Bucharest solemnly proclaimed Romania a Kingdom. By April 1881 all major European Powers had officially recognized the Kingdom of Romania. The ascension to the rank of Kingdom has strengthened the position of the dynasty in the country, it bestowed the stability of the constitutional-monarchical institutions of the state and increased the cohesion of the population around the Throne. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The prolongation of the Italian-Turkish War encouraged the Balkan peoples to attack Turkey in September 1912. The declared aim was to release the conationals in the Ottoman Empire and to unify the liberated territories. In this situation, Turkey saw herself obliged to conclude peace with Italy, in Lausanne, on October 15, 1912, surrendering and giving up Tripolitania and Cyrenaica. As such, the Balkan States made a great service to Italy, as Italy in its turn had helped drawing Turkey into a war that has weakened it from all points of view. The Balkan Alliance generated various reactions among the European powers, since it was born under the patronage of Russia, an empire that hoped to be able to count, in the event of an increasingly predictable European war, on a major political and military force in the South-East Europe, but it overestimated the influence exercised over these States because the Balkan allies attacked the Ottoman Empire at a time when Russia had not accomplished all military preparations. The entry of the Romanian armies and their march towards Bulgaria and Sofia had an important role in the cessation of hostilities and the start of peace talks. They were held in Bucharest, which highlighted Romania's role in settling the conflict. The peace of Bucharest generated different reactions among the European powers, according to the interests and rivalries in the area. The most affected was Austro-Hungary which claimed the allegiance of the ratification of the treaty to a European Conference, but France, Russia and the United Kingdom opposed to any revisions, whereas Italy and Germany, not excluding this possibility, considered that the decisions adopted in Bucharest had to be respected. However, the Balkan wars did not solve all territorial issues, many of the decisions taken were subsequently challenged and hence in applicable. There were still disputed territories, as well as countries discontented because of the lack of a seashore access, of the collapse of a hegemony vision, or of the loss of some key positions. Soon, all these rivalries and disputes became evident in connection with the outbreak of World War I. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]