Teorija nadmoći i rat na teritoriju bivše Jugoslavije (1991.-1995.).

This article investigates which one of two competing theories -- balance of power theory or power preponderance theory -- better explains war on the territory of former Yugoslavia. The main finding is that military preponderance in favour of Serbia fostered aggression of this state on Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Furthermore, relative balance of power, which was established in 1995, was the main reason for the termination of hostilities and for the Dayton peace agreement. Consequently, this article concludes that case study of the war on the territory of former Yugoslavia is an additional argument in favour of classical balance of power theory and that power preponderance theory cannot explain neither outbreak nor ending of this war. This article also challenges previous interpretations of war in former Yugoslavia, which claimed that this war was a civil war based on ethnic hatred. In contrast, this article argues that conflict on the territory of former Yugoslavia was primarily an interstate war based on rational calculations of main actors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]