In this article, we investigate the public memory of the First World War as written into the national histories of Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia in the run-up to the centennial of the outbreak of the War. Assuming that public uses of history are influenced by demands in their present as well as commemorative traditions, we study the First World War in official and semi-official national narratives in the three states and in their Yugoslav predecessors. The main sources of our analyses are schoolbooks and popular history books, supplemented by history debates in the media. First World War memory is both shared and divided: Though a catastrophe everywhere, to Serbia it was a triumph on the allied side, whereas in Bosnia and Croatia it was mainly a state collapse. Yet, the War also provided the conditions for creation of the first Yugoslav state, and consequently war history was narrated within a Yugoslav context. In socialist Yugoslavia, the triumphant Serbian narrative was expanded to include the rest of Yugoslavia and a Marxist interpretation was added. After the fall of Yugoslavia, the Serbian history remains heroic, now with a strictly national focus, while different and less prominent narratives are being created in Croatia and Bosnia.
What role can culture play in mass protests? How important a factor was culture for the 100,000 people who took to the Moscow streets following the parliamentary elections in December 2011? In this article I argue that values and perceptions undergo changes long before social eruptions take place, changes that are reflected and expressed in culture before being articulated in political terms. I discuss the role of contemporary art in Russian society during the 2000s and the mind-liberating function of Russian art during these years of reconfiguring the sensory landscape, exposing shifts in the official discourse, and in some cases as a substitute for politics. I argue that art contributed to a process of subjectivation in the words of Jacques Rancière.
This article explores climate change adaptation policy in the Russian city of Arkhangelsk through a network governance lens. In the identified state/non-state networks, research communities are included but NGOs tend to be peripheral. Unless foreign actors are heavily involved, networks tend not to focus on climate change adaptation but rather on «smaller» issues that can be related to adaptation. The subject of adaptation is discursively and institutionally fragmented and lacks a policy network or institution with coordinating authority. Federal ambitions for climate change adaptation appear unfulfilled at the local level.