APA 6th Edition Sadkovich, J.J. (2006). FRANJO TUĐMAN AND THE MUSLIM-CROAT WAR OF 1993. Review of Croatian history, II (1), 207-245. Retrieved from https://hrcak.srce.hr/15856
MLA 8th Edition Sadkovich, James J.. "FRANJO TUĐMAN AND THE MUSLIM-CROAT WAR OF 1993." Review of Croatian history, vol. II, no. 1, 2006, pp. 207-245. https://hrcak.srce.hr/15856. Accessed 20 Oct. 2019.
Chicago 17th Edition Sadkovich, James J.. "FRANJO TUĐMAN AND THE MUSLIM-CROAT WAR OF 1993." Review of Croatian history II, no. 1 (2006): 207-245. https://hrcak.srce.hr/15856
Harvard Sadkovich, J.J. (2006). 'FRANJO TUĐMAN AND THE MUSLIM-CROAT WAR OF 1993', Review of Croatian history, II(1), pp. 207-245. Available at: https://hrcak.srce.hr/15856 (Accessed 20 October 2019)
Vancouver Sadkovich JJ. FRANJO TUĐMAN AND THE MUSLIM-CROAT WAR OF 1993. Review of Croatian history [Internet]. 2006 [cited 2019 October 20];II(1):207-245. Available from: https://hrcak.srce.hr/15856
IEEE J.J. Sadkovich, "FRANJO TUĐMAN AND THE MUSLIM-CROAT WAR OF 1993", Review of Croatian history, vol.II, no. 1, pp. 207-245, 2006. [Online]. Available: https://hrcak.srce.hr/15856. [Accessed: 20 October 2019]
Abstracts From the fall of 1992 through spring of 1994, the Croatian Defense Council and the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina fought a war which proved disastrous for both Croatia and Bosnia's Croats. Franjo Tuđman's support of the HVO earned his government the sobriquet of agressor and seemed to confirm rumors of a secret deal to divvy up Bosnia and Herzegovina that he had purportedly made with Slobodan Milišević in 1991. But these are not accurate, nor even very useful, interpretations, if we are interested in understanding what occured in order to learn lessons for the future, They are the result of a scholarly literature which is based on a profoundly flawed narrative cobbled together by observers in Zagreb, Belgrade, Sarajevo, Washington, D.C., and other capitals, with a modicum of input from reporters on the ground in BOsnia and Herzegovina. Most observers and journalists appear to have had a poor grasp of the history of the region and little understanding of the opposing forces operating there, and even those who understood the region have offered problematic interpretations, in no small part owing to the fragmented and misleading information available, but also because, like reporters and pundits, scholars tended to take sides.